On 1/11/01 10:38 PM, "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:26 11/1/01 -0800, James Duncan Davidson wrote:
>> I disagree that we need a way to say that a property is immutable.
>
> I am not sure you handle things like commandline overides, other static
> defines (like compiler) etc.
\
See other mail.
>> Also, with breaking things into workspace/module as the current docs that
>> I've put up suggest, the properties are scoped well enough not to have the
>> inheritance problem.
>
> The workspace/module is only two levels. this may be satisfactory for small
> to medium projects but definetly doesn't cover all cases and thus I believe
> we still need inheritance.
I'd rather see some preprocessor that could handle the bigger more
specialized cases.
--
James Duncan Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
!try; do()
