This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Archer project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: freshly-cut python patches

El mar, 14-10-2008 a las 13:45 -0600, Tom Tromey escribiÃ:
> Thiago> I saw some fixes from you on that code, not sure if it was
> Thiago> related to pretty-printing or not.
> I've tried to be careful about making separate commits, but I think
> there is a case or two where I didn't.  Sorry about that.

Nothing to be sorry about, it was easy to work with the commits you
made. I was just pointing out what I saw while working with them.

> Thiago> - I'm not sure yet how to organize the pretty-printing work. A few
> Thiago> commits are floating around in isolation as a result of this. Initially,
> Thiago> I was thinking of having two patches: a "ground work and CLI pretty
> Thiago> printing" patch and an "MI pretty printing" patch, but it would take
> Thiago> some effort to make the division. Besides, you and Vladimir will
> Thiago> probably have to agree anyway before submitting any of the patches, so
> Thiago> there seems to be no benefit in the separation and I'm thinking of
> Thiago> making only one pretty printing patch. WDYT?
> Yes, I think one patch is what we should do.  The MI and CLI cases are
> tied together now -- they share a good amount of code.
> The pretty-printing code isn't really ready yet, though.  I am still
> working on the MI bits.  Also, I think we might want to change the
> auto-loading stuff a little.

Ok. I'll merge all the pretty-printing-related patches and commits in
the near future. For the auto-loading bits, I suggest keeping them
separate since they have a good chance of being discussed for some time
when submitted, and the pretty-printing part could be committed earlier.

> I think a good candidate for the next patch would be more additions to
> Value.  On the branch I added a couple methods, and these are needed
> to write decent pretty-printers.  I can submit this one if you would
> prefer.

Either way is fine by me.

> There are a few other things that are a bit less intertwined that we
> could clean up and submit after that.  Specifically I'm thinking of
> convenience functions, commands, and parameters.

Ok. Convenience functions in particular is a good one, because Rob
Quill's scope checking patch (which didn't go in yet) could use it. The
others are good candidates too.
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]