On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 02:36:47PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Sean Davis wrote: > > > >It does seem that way. I've rewritten most of the network code in > >LambdaMOO 1.8.1+foo, since it was, well, ancient and disgusting. (sorry, > >but > >there hasn't been a need to use /dev/tcp on Solaris in the last, oh, ten > >years :P) > > > >Now the network stuff at least is sane. Too bad I've still gotta eventually > >rewrite the memory stuff / ref counting - it's horribly broken on Alpha, > >and > >very very poorly designed in the first place. (don't believe me? watch the > >infinite loop you get when trying to load a working core into a lambdamoo > >binary linked against electricfence..) > > > >The lambda+foo project is basically aimed at (some day) having a good MOO > >server based on the old code but with all the glaring problems fixed. Some > >day might be quite a while away, but we have improved things a bit, at > >least. > > > > So we have lambda+foo, GammaMOO, etc, ... it seems awful that we need > all this forking.
Agreed. Very wholeheartedly. Maintaining a fork with a bunch of code changes and then picking up the (rare!!) change from the lambdamoo sf project sucks: it usually needs to be manually merged, due to, for instance, the fact that I took $Log$ out of my sources a long long time ago (all it does is bloat them, and I can run cvs log ;), among other changes. > Also, with 32-bit computers on the way out, dumping the use of symlinks > for floating-point numbers is a good thing, and similarly, we should > enable Unicode handling. Yes. In fact, it surprises me very much that I can load a core on a MSB LP64 machine (UltraSPARC in this case) and have it work just fine. Then again, UltraSPARC is not nearly as picky as Alpha when it comes to unaligned memory access. > > I guess what I'm asking is: is there any reason to not do this kind of > work against the CVS tree on Sourceforge, and to pick someone as release > coordinator, for something we can call 1.9.0 or 2.0.0? Well, I would like to say this is a good idea, but I'm not sure. Different people want different feature sets in their server... for example, I have the lists builtins (modified), both FileIO and FUP (both of which I use), and some extensions I've written myself. Many people might not want any of that. Many might want some of it. Many might want more. So... since we don't have a stable base we can just maintain patches against, we end up with a handful of forks, all of which I would be signifigantly differ from each other. Whoever ends up with the task as release coordinator... I pity them, having to put all the pieces together in a way that causes the least burning at the stake ;-) -Sean -- /~\ The ASCII \ / Ribbon Campaign Sean Davis X Against HTML aka dive / \ Email! ############################################################# This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Send administrative queries to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
