Re: [fpc-devel] Closures / anonymous methods

[Sven Barth]

Am 25.11.2016 15:30 schrieb :
>
> On 24.11.2016 21:38, Sven Barth wrote:
>>
>> On 31.10.2016 14:58, bla...@blaise.ru wrote:
>>>
>>> I would like a commitment from at least one of the committers to work
closely with me during that period on resolving issues that prevent
merging. And by that I mean to be ready to react to my changes/questions
within a day/two/three (not a month) as we both go through the list item by
item.
>>
>> I'll be at home next week due to a vacation and my hope is that I'll be
able to work on a couple of FPC topics that are still open.
>
>
> So, is that a commitment? Do I book my next week for this? :)

Just to be sure: we're talking about the week from 28th to 2nd. If so, yes
I'll try to make sure that I'm available. Maybe I'll even hang around on
IRC :)

Regards,
Sven
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel

Re: [fpc-devel] Closures / anonymous methods

[Zoë Peterson]

> So what next? Blaise is still interested in? Am I alone on battle
> field?  Is Scooter Software around? I am confused.

Yes, we're still around.  Yes, we're still willing to throw some money 
at anyone else who can help get this pushed in, whether that's Blaise, 
Sven, or Maciej.  I don't have experiencing with the compiler team 
organization or patch process though, and we're preparing a new release 
right now though, so aside from money, I'm not sure we'll be able to do 
anything until it's pushed into trunk.  We need the feature for new 
code, not existing, so I don't have test cases, and I can't justify the 
time to develope that code until I know we'll be able to use it.


--
Zoë Peterson
Scooter Software

___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel

Re: [fpc-devel] Closures / anonymous methods

[Blaise]

On 24.11.2016 21:38, Sven Barth wrote:

On 31.10.2016 14:58, bla...@blaise.ru wrote:

I would like a commitment from at least one of the committers to work closely 
with me during that period on resolving issues that prevent merging. And by 
that I mean to be ready to react to my changes/questions within a day/two/three 
(not a month) as we both go through the list item by item.

I'll be at home next week due to a vacation and my hope is that I'll be able to 
work on a couple of FPC topics that are still open.


So, is that a commitment? Do I book my next week for this? :)

--
βþ
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel

Re: [fpc-devel] Closures / anonymous methods

[Sven Barth]

Am 25.11.2016 09:45 schrieb "Maciej Izak" :
>
>
> 2016-11-24 19:38 GMT+01:00 Sven Barth :
>>
>> mea culpa
>
>
> So what next? Blaise is still interested in? Am I alone on battle field?
Is Scooter Software around? I am confused.

Give them some time to answer. After all I had written this mail not even
24h ago. ;)
Nevertheless I've now added both Blaise and Zoë in CC so that they're
definitely aware that there's a reply.

Regards,
Sven
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel

[fpc-devel] Crosscompiling win towards darwin

[Alfred]

Well, we're talking about two different things. In this interpretation,
NewPascal serves as some kind of FPC-experimental branch. Which is 
nice,

and nothing to have against it.

But still, before merging anything to a master branch, there should be 
a

way to review patches for obvious mistakes, or simply doing things in a
wrong way. I see your pull request was accepted without comments in 
four

hours after its submission. Which - given the amount of IFDEFs it
contains, still "ouch", IMO. No offense, and nothing personal, just the
criticism of the general approach towards code quality in a project 
with

the size of FPC.

However, I agree that the FPC team should have a more streamlined way 
of
accepting and reviewing patches, than posting diffs to a bugtracker or 
a
mailing list. The Bazaar went elsewhere over the years, which is always 
a
problem for an opensource project. But the tooling problem is only part 
of

the story.


Thanks for your elaboration.
And again, this is why we needed NewPascal.
I know that my patches are not perfect, and perhaps also not valid.
Meaning that we would have to wait for ages to get things done in FPC 
trunk.

Which is good IMHO: FPC trunk must be 100% ok for all.

All NewPascal changes are out in the open. Ready for use and review.
The NewPascal contributors hope that one day, after thorough review, 
these changes will find their way into FPC.
And yes, sometimes these changes will cause an "ough", but that is also 
part of the fun ... ;-)


___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel

Re: [fpc-devel] Crosscompiling win towards darwin

[Karoly Balogh (Charlie/SGR)]

Hi,

On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Alfred wrote:

> > TL;DR: if this patch was accepted into NewPascal w/o comments or concerns,
> > then "ouch"...
>
> Thanks for your advice.
> This is exactly why NewPascal is here !
>
> Have an idea. Implement. Make public.
> perfect:=false;
> while (NOT perfect) Use; Get feedback; Correct mistakes; Test; if ok then
> perfect:=true; end;

Well, we're talking about two different things. In this interpretation,
NewPascal serves as some kind of FPC-experimental branch. Which is nice,
and nothing to have against it.

But still, before merging anything to a master branch, there should be a
way to review patches for obvious mistakes, or simply doing things in a
wrong way. I see your pull request was accepted without comments in four
hours after its submission. Which - given the amount of IFDEFs it
contains, still "ouch", IMO. No offense, and nothing personal, just the
criticism of the general approach towards code quality in a project with
the size of FPC.

However, I agree that the FPC team should have a more streamlined way of
accepting and reviewing patches, than posting diffs to a bugtracker or a
mailing list. The Bazaar went elsewhere over the years, which is always a
problem for an opensource project. But the tooling problem is only part of
the story.

> I will have a look at the patches again.

Cool, please keep us posted for updates.

Charlie
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel

Re: [fpc-devel] Closures / anonymous methods

[Maciej Izak]

2016-11-24 19:38 GMT+01:00 Sven Barth :

> mea culpa


So what next? Blaise is still interested in? Am I alone on battle field? Is
Scooter Software around? I am confused.

-- 
Best regards,
Maciej Izak
___
fpc-devel maillist  -  fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel