Am 10.10.2010 15:41, schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: > Florian Klämpfl schrieb: > >>>>> What do you feel a need for sorting out? >>>> Splitting the patch in understandable parts which can be committed >>>> separately with appropriate commit messages, >>> I.e. one patch for every single moved variable??? >> >> If needed, yes. If one variable is moved and it involves more files, it >> needs a separate commit. It makes also things like bisecting bugs easier. > > So you already found bugs in my contribution?
Yes. The change in cfidwarf reverted a bug fix of a few days ago. > >>> Feel free to apply these >>> patches first... >> >> This another part of the mess. > > Ah, I see. My work is not appreciated at all, and now it is rejected for > almost formal reasons :-( Indeed, also formalisms are a reason to reject a patch. > > >>> Question: do you have a better solution for the ppudump dependencies? >> >> There is nothing wrong with using aasmbase in ppudump. > > Using aasmbase will introduce unwanted dependencies later, occuring in > the used units. No. It does not. aasmbase depends only on a very few basic compiler (and rtl units). > > > Simple question: would you apply my patches immediately, if they *only* > would meet the expected granularity and coding style? > No patch will be applied immediatly and only fullfilling basic coding requirements is needed but not sufficient. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel