Menu
▾
▴
corelinux-develop
|
From: Christophe Prud'h. <pru...@MI...> - 2000-08-16 21:39:11
|
Hi I use CORELINUX_MAP and CORELINUX_VECTOR macros they are fine but don't you think that it is a brain pain to remember to swap the name and the type all the time? I mean generally we do typedef Type newType; BTW DECLARE_TYPE is just fine for that but in the _MAP and VECTOR macros the arguments are not in the right order. Now it is CORELINUX_VECTOR( NewVector, double) and IMHO should be CORELINUX_VECTOR( double, NewVector ) just for the sake of a coherent behaviour. Comments? Am I missing something? regards C. -- Christophe Prud'homme | MIT, 77, Mass Ave, Rm 3-243 | As flies to wanton boys are we Cambridge MA 02139 | to the gods; they kill us for Tel (Office) : (00 1) (617) 253 0229 | their sport. Fax (Office) : (00 1) (617) 258 8559 | -- Shakespeare, "King Lear" http://augustine.mit.edu/~prudhomm | Following the hacker spirit |
|
From: Hans - D. <dul...@eg...> - 2000-08-16 21:50:22
|
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Christophe Prud'homme wrote: > Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:38:56 -0400 > From: Christophe Prud'homme <pru...@MI...> > Reply-To: cor...@li... > To: cor...@li... > Subject: [Corelinux-develop] comment on corelinux macros > > Hi > > I use CORELINUX_MAP and CORELINUX_VECTOR macros > they are fine but don't you think that it is a brain pain > to remember to swap the name and the type all the time? > > I mean generally we do > > typedef Type newType; > > BTW DECLARE_TYPE is just fine for that > > but in the _MAP and VECTOR macros the arguments are not in the right order. > > Now it is > CORELINUX_VECTOR( NewVector, double) > and IMHO should be > CORELINUX_VECTOR( double, NewVector ) > just for the sake of a coherent behaviour. > > Comments? If coherent is the objective, I agree with you. > Am I missing something? > > regards > C. > > -- Hans Dulimarta, Ph.D. dul...@co... P: 517-432-7589 http://www.egr.msu.edu/~dulimart F: 760-281-7691 http://corelinux.sourceforge.net Elec. & Comp. Engg., Mich. State Univ., E. Lansing, MI 48824 |
|
From: Frank V. C. <fr...@co...> - 2000-08-16 23:43:23
|
Christophe Prud'homme wrote: > > Hi > > I use CORELINUX_MAP and CORELINUX_VECTOR macros > they are fine but don't you think that it is a brain pain > to remember to swap the name and the type all the time? > > I mean generally we do > > typedef Type newType; > > BTW DECLARE_TYPE is just fine for that > > but in the _MAP and VECTOR macros the arguments are not in the right order. > > Now it is > CORELINUX_VECTOR( NewVector, double) > and IMHO should be > CORELINUX_VECTOR( double, NewVector ) > just for the sake of a coherent behaviour. > > Comments? > Am I missing something? There is no logic to the order in the macro, other than they are consistent between themselves (name,type, ...). so I take it you are suggesting (type, name,...) to be more like the DECLARE_TYPE. That is fine, except we are now faced with an interface change throughout the library, examples, and whatever else users in the world will have to change. If you feel it is right (and I think both you and Hans do, and I do as well), go for it. It won't be the last time some legacy stuff I threw in there will come back to haunt us. :) -- Frank V. Castellucci |
|
From: Christophe Prud'h. <pru...@us...> - 2000-08-17 00:20:00
|
> There is no logic to the order in the macro, other than they are > consistent between themselves (name,type, ...). > > so I take it you are suggesting (type, name,...) to be more like the > DECLARE_TYPE. yes actually being consistent with the underlying naming/typedefing is good so that it is easy to remember. I say this as a user that's all > If you feel it is right (and I think both you and Hans do, and I do as > well), go for it. It won't be the last time some legacy stuff I threw in > there will come back to haunt us. :) I'll do that That's a huge job for the examples, I'll try to automate it :) -- Christophe Prud'homme OOA and OOD for Linux CoreLinux -- http://corelinux.sourceforge.net Finite Element Method Codes KFem -- http://kfem.sourceforge.net |
|
From: Frank V. C. <fr...@co...> - 2000-08-17 00:23:21
|
Christophe Prud'homme wrote: > > > There is no logic to the order in the macro, other than they are > > consistent between themselves (name,type, ...). > > > > so I take it you are suggesting (type, name,...) to be more like the > > DECLARE_TYPE. > > yes actually being consistent with the underlying naming/typedefing is good > so that it is easy to remember. > > I say this as a user that's all > > > If you feel it is right (and I think both you and Hans do, and I do as > > well), go for it. It won't be the last time some legacy stuff I threw in > > there will come back to haunt us. :) > I'll do that > That's a huge job for the examples, I'll try to automate it :) sed and awk together? Hey, do you guys have write access to clfw? They did not respond to the service request yet but it may have been fixed. -- Frank V. Castellucci http://corelinux.sourceforge.net OOA/OOD/C++ Standards and Guidelines for Linux http://PythPat.sourceforge.net Pythons Pattern Package |
|
From: Christophe Prud'h. <pru...@us...> - 2000-08-17 00:32:17
|
> sed and awk together? nope perl, I try to become a perl programmer so that's a good way to learn:) I am ok with sed and awk so that's as fun as perl which is incredibly cryptic I think that the guy(Larry Wall) who wrote the grammar of this language is either very good or very crazy or may be both > > Hey, do you guys have write access to clfw? They did not respond to the > service request yet but it may have been fixed. cvs rm libtool cvs [server aborted]: "remove" requires write access to the repository :( -- Christophe Prud'homme OOA and OOD for Linux CoreLinux -- http://corelinux.sourceforge.net Finite Element Method Codes KFem -- http://kfem.sourceforge.net |
|
From: Hans D. <dul...@eg...> - 2000-08-18 03:28:38
|
"Frank V. Castellucci" wrote: > > Christophe Prud'homme wrote: > > > > > There is no logic to the order in the macro, other than they are > > > consistent between themselves (name,type, ...). > > > > > > so I take it you are suggesting (type, name,...) to be more like the > > > DECLARE_TYPE. > > > > yes actually being consistent with the underlying naming/typedefing is good > > so that it is easy to remember. > > > > I say this as a user that's all > > > > > If you feel it is right (and I think both you and Hans do, and I do as > > > well), go for it. It won't be the last time some legacy stuff I threw in > > > there will come back to haunt us. :) > > I'll do that > > That's a huge job for the examples, I'll try to automate it :) > > sed and awk together? > > Hey, do you guys have write access to clfw? They did not respond to the > service request yet but it may have been fixed. > I could add, commit, remove, commit a file (called "newfile"). I hope it does not clutter up the Attic. > -- > Frank V. Castellucci > http://corelinux.sourceforge.net > OOA/OOD/C++ Standards and Guidelines for Linux > http://PythPat.sourceforge.net > Pythons Pattern Package > > _______________________________________________ > Corelinux-develop mailing list > Cor...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/corelinux-develop -- Hans Dulimarta, Ph.D. dul...@co... P: 517-432-7589 http://www.egr.msu.edu/~dulimart F: 760-281-7691 http://corelinux.sourceforge.net Elec. & Comp. Engg., Mich. State Univ., E. Lansing, MI 48824 |
|
From: Frank V. C. <fr...@co...> - 2000-08-18 03:32:57
|
Hans Dulimarta wrote: > > "Frank V. Castellucci" wrote: > > > > Christophe Prud'homme wrote: > > > > > > > There is no logic to the order in the macro, other than they are > > > > consistent between themselves (name,type, ...). > > > > > > > > so I take it you are suggesting (type, name,...) to be more like the > > > > DECLARE_TYPE. > > > > > > yes actually being consistent with the underlying naming/typedefing is good > > > so that it is easy to remember. > > > > > > I say this as a user that's all > > > > > > > If you feel it is right (and I think both you and Hans do, and I do as > > > > well), go for it. It won't be the last time some legacy stuff I threw in > > > > there will come back to haunt us. :) > > > I'll do that > > > That's a huge job for the examples, I'll try to automate it :) > > > > sed and awk together? > > > > Hey, do you guys have write access to clfw? They did not respond to the > > service request yet but it may have been fixed. > > > > I could add, commit, remove, commit a file (called "newfile"). > I hope it does not clutter up the Attic. That turned out to be Christophe's problem, he forgot he did an anonymous check-out. :) -- Frank V. Castellucci |
