Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of t.p.ellison@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.92.173 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=JYneovJnzm82TKJFHB8IL7FWAMCQpHCgomW10KTUnSHmIkPfdz+gh+ryUtrH05k76toYuT7YR635BULzfSAzn1Msa8DEMg9iulkZLW1rKGO02FA+eSXG5yHlFv/j2AzO3F7Buk5HvNPul0E6MomH131bCz/FjJZBsFaOdqhb2yQ=
Message-ID: <45487302.90101@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 10:12:18 +0000
From: Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib] Preprocessor - CHECKPOINT
References: <8E389A5F2FEABA4CB1DEC35A25CB39CE694EF8@mssmsx411>
	 <2c9597b90610300905h2792f22bk430c272b5f4c1dc2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4546445E.9050904@pobox.com>
 <4546709B.9090704@gmail.com>	 <4546B5DE.3040609@pobox.com>
	 <bc79dd600610310010w155a97f4wd99deab516187c7a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45470FA5.2000801@gmail.com>
	 <bc79dd600610310117j5bb0903ds509f0d854845477e@mail.gmail.com>
	 <45473BA9.1070709@gmail.com>
 <bc79dd600610310412w6b7a64dfo3c4758ddb14409c0@mail.gmail.com>
 <45474144.5060108@pobox.com> <4547431C.5080000@pobox.com>
 <45479C08.1000608@sablevm.org> <4547C9AF.9040707@gmail.com>
 <4547DB5A.2090104@sablevm.org>
In-Reply-To: <4547DB5A.2090104@sablevm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Etienne Gagnon wrote:
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> IMO it's not ideal that the preprocessed source still contains all the
>> streams, albeit in comments.  It wouldn't make the source very
>> 'consumable' to the Mrs. SE or ME developer.
> 
> Hmmm...  It's always possible to have a special output mode that puts
> empty (or advertizing, hehe) comments, instead of other stream code
> (thus, preserving line numbers).

Right, but it was the presence of the comments, not the contents of the
comments that I was objecting to.  Using padding comments would be bad
too IMO.

<snipped example>

> So, J2ME & J2SE end-developers are kept happy.

As I said before, I like the idea to be able to flip the comments
between different processor targets for the benefit of Harmony
developers.  So, for example, you can work with your SE spectacles on,
and I can work with my ME spectacles on, then we both commit to the
repository in a canonical form.  However, for the end-user (Mrs Java
developer) the processor would strip out the irrelevant streams' code
from the canonical form to produce a clean target source code.

> As a bonu$, you can al$o $tart a nice busine$$ $elling advertizing $pace
> in $ource code.  ;-P

LOL -- hey, now you are talking ;-)

Regards,
Tim

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)