Re: [Nxtcommand-developers] iCommand 0.5 CLDC pre2

[Brian B. <bba...@mt...>]

Well, I'm probably the last guy who should have final say on which way to 
go, seeing as my experience isn't great with preprocessor usage. Here's how 
I break it down in pluses and minuses:

Two Separate Code Bases:
+ Neater code
- Must manually move improvements from one project to the other

Preprocessor commands:
- Code looks messy
- More complicated, higher learning curve for developers
+ An improvement for one platform improves all platforms

To me it looks like Preprocessor commands wins out because manually updating 
code for each project will be a tedious task. I think our preprocessor 
commands are going to be limited to just a few places, and once we get the 
Ant-Build script in place it will be one click to build the respective 
projects.

Are there other pluses/minuses I'm missing? Like I say, I'm not too familiar 
with these tools.

- Brian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Joosten" <ptg...@ch...>
To: "Stefano Sanna" <ger...@ti...>; "iCommand Developers" 
<nxt...@li...>
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Nxtcommand-developers] iCommand 0.5 CLDC pre2


> Just to be sure: I have no "hard" objections when the CLDC projects have a
> modified copy of icommand in it. Maybe my arguments are becoming a little
> theoretical. Using 1 source tree will surely increase complexity, and
> (probably)
> needs more strict planning of releases. And to be honest, using 
> preprocessor
> commands
> is the only way (I know of) to have 1 source tree to support multiple
> execution
> environments, but hat does not mean that I like #ifdef / #endif cluttering
> my code.
>
>> Brian, you have the final word :-)
>
> I agree @:-$)>
>
> Peter Joosten.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nxt...@li...
>> [mailto:nxt...@li...]On Behalf Of
>> Stefano Sanna
>> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 9:54 AM
>> To: iCommand Developers
>> Subject: Re: [Nxtcommand-developers] iCommand 0.5 CLDC pre2
>>
>>
>> Peter Joosten wrote:
>> > My opinion (this should be our goal, if it is practically
>> feasible ...?):
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Using preprocessor seems nice, however it brings a new issue. Suppose we
>> have a source code version 2.0. Somebody writes an enhancement to such
>> version, just for the "JSE side", while the "JME side" is still to be
>> update. How do we release this new version? 2.1? Yes and no. It is 2.1
>> from the JSE point of view, while it is still a 2.0 from the JME point
>> of view.
>>
>> What I want to say is that merging JME and JSE code makes sense only if
>> we synchronously release the same version for both platforms. Otherwise
>> it will get confused. Moreover, Javadoc generation will have to take
>> into account differences between JSE and JME.
>>
>> Brian, you have the final word :-)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Stefano.
>>
>> --
>> Stefano Sanna - ger...@ti...
>> Personal web site: http://www.gerdavax.it
>> AIM: gerdavax - Skype: gerdavax - Callsign: IS0DZE
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to
>> share your
>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nxtcommand-developers mailing list
>> Nxt...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nxtcommand-developers
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share 
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Nxtcommand-developers mailing list
> Nxt...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nxtcommand-developers
>