harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Preprocessor
Date Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:27:39 GMT


Tim Ellison wrote:
> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
>> What are the reasons to exclude the most standard solution here: branching.
>> Do you think we need a lot of them?
> 
> I don't think we are excluding any option for maintaining similar code
> streams (5.0 & 6.0, SE & ME, etc.) it's just a discussion at the moment.
> 
> Similarly, I'm not advocating the use of aspects for maintaining
> different code streams; but rather I was saying that IDE support is
> likely going to be a requirement for any technology (apt, preprocessor,
> post-processing, aspects, ...) that we choose to solve the problem.
> 
> I'm sure we wouldn't even want simple branching without a decent merge
> tool to keep things in sync.

Yes - that's what I'm scared of.   A branch solution sounds like it 
leads to much misery and woe, because i think all the factors that make 
this such an interesting problem for which a pre-processor is a valid 
solution this implies the requirement of some kind of conditional merge

> 
> I agree with Geir that we should endeavour to choose a technology that
> has broad tooling support.
> 
> Regards,
> Tim
> 

Mime
View raw message