From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2008-01-17 12:08:52
|
> -----Original Message----- > From: Colin Adams > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:20 AM > To: Eric Bezault > Subject: Comments in KI_BUFFER > > I just took a look at this class (I got a Rose Studio > notification about it, and I didn't recall the name). > > At least two of the routines have comments like: > > -- TODO: This routine should be deferred, but there is > -- a bug with ISE Eiffel 5.1.5 and 5.2 in the generated > -- C code in finalized mode, and having this > -- routine effective is a workaround. > > Does this still apply with 5.7? I would hope not, but I never checked since then. Note that there might be other comments like that explaining workarounds for various compilers and compiler versions. I will need to do some clean up at some stage. In particular, I plan to remove the remaining vestiges of VE (as you pointed out a couple of months ago, there are still some references to VE laying around). There is indeed very little chances that VE resurrects from its ashes. We also need to make a final decision about SE 1.2. It looks like there is still no sign of life over there. The next release of ISE will be in June (or May, I don't remember), and the next release of Gobo will be just before. I was planning to give SE 1.2 a chance to get back to life say one month before the release in order to make a decision. But now that the Gobo bootstrap does not even work with SE 1.2 (because of UNIX_FILE_INFO for example), I really wonder why we should wait until then. Why should we keep the development of the Gobo project in slow gear because of a compiler that is currently (and possibly forever) not maintained? Should we decide now that SE 1.2 is not supported anymore, and let the job to the possible future maintainers of SE 1.2 to adapt it so that it can compile the Gobo project? After all, that's what I'm currently doing with 'gec': I adapt it so that it can compile Eiffel libraries other than those from Gobo, such as EiffelBase, EiffelVision2, etc. -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
From: Colin A. <col...@go...> - 2008-01-17 12:13:04
|
On 17/01/2008, Eric Bezault <er...@go...> wrote: > Should we decide now that SE 1.2 is not > supported anymore, and let the job to the possible future > maintainers of SE 1.2 to adapt it so that it can compile > the Gobo project? After all, that's what I'm currently doing > with 'gec': I adapt it so that it can compile Eiffel libraries > other than those from Gobo, such as EiffelBase, EiffelVision2, > etc I would say yes. |
From: Colin P. A. <co...@co...> - 2008-02-02 08:04:56
|
>>>>> "Colin" == Colin Adams <col...@go...> writes: Colin> On 17/01/2008, Eric Bezault <er...@go...> wrote: >> Should we decide now that SE 1.2 is not supported anymore, and >> let the job to the possible future maintainers of SE 1.2 to >> adapt it so that it can compile the Gobo project? After all, >> that's what I'm currently doing with 'gec': I adapt it so that >> it can compile Eiffel libraries other than those from Gobo, >> such as EiffelBase, EiffelVision2, etc Colin> I would say yes. Now Daniel has released SE 1.2r8 and is soliciting comments about the direction people want it to go, I'm not so sure. -- Colin Adams Preston Lancashire |
From: Eric B. <er...@go...> - 2008-02-02 13:25:19
|
Colin Paul Adams wrote: >>>>>> "Colin" == Colin Adams <col...@go...> writes: > > Colin> On 17/01/2008, Eric Bezault <er...@go...> wrote: > >> Should we decide now that SE 1.2 is not supported anymore, and > >> let the job to the possible future maintainers of SE 1.2 to > >> adapt it so that it can compile the Gobo project? After all, > >> that's what I'm currently doing with 'gec': I adapt it so that > >> it can compile Eiffel libraries other than those from Gobo, > >> such as EiffelBase, EiffelVision2, etc > > Colin> I would say yes. > > Now Daniel has released SE 1.2r8 and is soliciting comments about the > direction people want it to go, I'm not so sure. You might want to ask Daniel about the functionalities from FreeELKS's UNIX_FILE_INFO that you need in your classes. Or are they already available in one way or another in SE's kernel library classes? -- Eric Bezault mailto:er...@go... http://www.gobosoft.com |
From: Colin P. A. <co...@co...> - 2008-02-02 13:39:58
|
>>>>> "Eric" == Eric Bezault <er...@go...> writes: Eric> You might want to ask Daniel about the functionalities from Eric> FreeELKS's UNIX_FILE_INFO that you need in your classes. Or Eric> are they already available in one way or another in SE's Eric> kernel library classes? They are available. So I would have to write a .ge class - say KL_FILE_INFO. I'm going to wait a few weeks, to see what the results of his inquiries are - to see if he will commit to moving in the direction of ECMA. -- Colin Adams Preston Lancashire |