Op 2010-10-22 03:41, Travis Siegel het geskryf:
personally, if I wanted to do something major with fpc, I'd not bother
trying to get it integrated to the main branch, I'd spawn my own
project, call it something else, and make it clear that it comes from
It seems more and more people are
Am 22.10.2010 03:21, schrieb Adem:
On 2010-10-22 02:50, Henry Vermaak wrote:
2010/10/21 Adem listmem...@letterboxes.org:
On 2010-10-22 01:23, Henry Vermaak wrote:
Did you notice the word 'promises'?
Somehow you have to prove these promises.
And, how exactly do you expect them to be proved?
Am 22.10.2010 09:08, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
Op 2010-10-22 03:41, Travis Siegel het geskryf:
personally, if I wanted to do something major with fpc, I'd not bother
trying to get it integrated to the main branch, I'd spawn my own
project, call it something else, and make it clear that it
On 22 Oct 2010, at 10:31, Adem wrote:
Focus on unit compilation/loading and/or the register allocator?
Of course, you could do that (and by the looks of it, it already is
on your mental roadmap too), but are they really --really-- that
critical?
Fixing the the unit reloading logic is
Am 22.10.2010 10:31, schrieb Adem:
Let's suppose that we have agreed that it would be much more fun and
more useful to turn FPC itself into a kind of component/module which
itself is composed of components/modules so that people can use FPC as
an engine for their projects more directly, while
Adem schrieb:
1) In the fpc-devel I have read quite a few arguments that FPC is
production quality and no significant changes can be afforded to that code.
This should have been stated much earlier, before I ever started to
think about refactoring the compiler :-(
While I sympathize with
Florian Klämpfl schrieb:
1) In the fpc-devel I have read quite a few arguments that FPC is
production quality and no significant changes can be afforded to that code.
While I sympathize with what that implies, it also means that,
structurally, FPC is more or less frozen
This is wrong. If a
Am 22.10.2010 11:28, schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich:
Henry Vermaak schrieb:
Oh wow, so you want to change the parser because it sounds nice to you?
Seriously, if this work was done more co-operatively with the fpc
team, it may have made it. But I think it is too ambitious in the
first
On 22 October 2010 10:28, Hans-Peter Diettrich drdiettri...@aol.com wrote:
Henry Vermaak schrieb:
Oh wow, so you want to change the parser because it sounds nice to you?
Seriously, if this work was done more co-operatively with the fpc
team, it may have made it. But I think it is too
On 2010-10-22 11:53, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Am 22.10.2010 10:31, schrieb Adem:
Let's suppose that we have agreed that it would be much more fun and
more useful to turn FPC itself into a kind of component/module which
itself is composed of components/modules so that people can use FPC as
an
On 2010-10-22 13:33, Adem wrote:
I'd bet you already didn't have a more detailed plan in your head.
This should have been: I'd bet you already *DO* have a more detailed
plan in your head.
___
fpc-other maillist - fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
On 2010-10-22 10:35, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Indeed, you're one of the few example where mailing list noise is not
inversely propotional with the produced code though you didn't fork FPC
yet either ;)
This 'list noise' concept must be peculiar to FPC/Lazarus crowd for I
have never seen it come
2010/10/22 Adem listmem...@letterboxes.org:
On 2010-10-22 11:53, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Am 22.10.2010 10:31, schrieb Adem:
Let's suppose that we have agreed that it would be much more fun and
more useful to turn FPC itself into a kind of component/module which
itself is composed of
Op 2010-10-22 12:43, Adem het geskryf:
This 'list noise' concept must be peculiar to FPC/Lazarus crowd for I
have never seen it come up anywhere else.
+1
Regards,
- Graeme -
--
fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free Pascal
http://opensoft.homeip.net:8080/fpgui/
Am 22.10.2010 12:33, schrieb Adem:
On 2010-10-22 11:53, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Am 22.10.2010 10:31, schrieb Adem:
Let's suppose that we have agreed that it would be much more fun and
more useful to turn FPC itself into a kind of component/module which
itself is composed of components/modules
Op 2010-10-22 13:02, Aleksa Todorovic het geskryf:
First, how would you prove you're worthy of the task?
Firstly, you need to understand how FPC development works, and to
accept that. Secondly, you need to show other FPC developers that you
are willing to work (continuous task) and work as
On 22 Oct 2010, at 13:38, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
This is where I think FPC and Lazarus teams get it all wrong. Not
everybody
wants to join for life, hold hands and cuddle around the source
code.
Many times I use a tool, find a bug or annoyance, fix it and
contribute
back by supplying a
On 2010-10-22 14:02, Aleksa Todorovic wrote:
2010/10/22 Ademlistmem...@letterboxes.org:
Let me answer as someone who wrote several patches, and only one or
two of them were accepted.
I do appreciate you responding to these questions, but I would also like
to hear Florian's comments for his
On 2010-10-22 14:27, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Anyways, just created a mail filter for you, guess where the mails end :)
I don't mind the filter; this is life, it happens,
But, I must say I am disappointed at the lack of management skills.
___
Am 22.10.2010 13:30, schrieb Helmut Hartl:
Am 22.10.10 13:09, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
Op 2010-10-22 12:43, Adem het geskryf:
This 'list noise' concept must be peculiar to FPC/Lazarus crowd for I
have never seen it come up anywhere else.
+1
-1E38
Adem schrieb:
On 2010-10-20 09:31, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Op 2010-10-20 03:30, Hans-Peter Diettrich het geskryf:
SourceForge has good project management tools, from bug reporting,
mailing lists (though I prefer newsgroups),
I also prefer newsgroups.
I could try to set one up, but INN
Jonas Maebe schrieb:
Fixing the the unit reloading logic is quite critical, because it's the
main cause of crashes and other weird errors you sometimes (or
regularly, depending on how many circular dependencies you have and the
kind of changes you make) get when recompiling units without
Am 22.10.2010 14:11, schrieb Florian Klaempfl:
Am 22.10.2010 13:38, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
God sakes man, this is ridiculous! Look at other successful open source
projects - they don't work like that. If your patch works, that enough.
Oh yes, bringing a patch into the linux kernel is
Am 22.10.2010 14:20, schrieb Sven Barth:
Am 22.10.2010 14:11, schrieb Florian Klaempfl:
Am 22.10.2010 13:38, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
God sakes man, this is ridiculous! Look at other successful open source
projects - they don't work like that. If your patch works, that enough.
Oh yes,
Op 2010-10-22 12:47, Hans-Peter Diettrich het geskryf:
Regardless of the reasons, a separate git repository would allow for any
number of additional contributions. My problem still is how to set up
such a repository, for public use, and how to sync it with the SVN
trunk. Can your
In our previous episode, Adem said:
I don't mind the filter; this is life, it happens,
But, I must say I am disappointed at the lack of management skills.
You should ask yourself how management skills work in a community where
nobody can force work on sb else.
Graeme's last mail where he
On 2010-10-22 21:20, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Adem said:
I don't mind the filter; this is life, it happens,
But, I must say I am disappointed at the lack of management skills.
You should ask yourself how management skills work in a community where
nobody can force
27 matches
Mail list logo
