On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Thomas Grill wrote:
and obviously i have been assigned the role of the "keeper of the
devel",
It's been a while that I've been thinking of you as the keeper of the
devel, and of myself as being a guest.
with all the freedom to make changes where i like, not having to keep an eye
on compatibility
Well, compatibility would be a lot easier if we had automated tests like
most programming languages have. (That's why I had started a project
called PureUnity)
- I'd find it beneficial to integrate Miller's changes that happened
since the last merge
Agreed.
- Branch off a devel branch (without version number) from Miller's latest cvs
I don't agree with that, I believe that it will be easier to merge things
the other way around.
- Gradually integrate the listed devel features into the branch, and also
making patches for Miller
Even though the 0.39->devel_0_39 is bigger, making patches for Miller
would be one reason to start the new devel branch from Miller's 0.40, but
I'm not going to encourage making patches for Miller.
- Rethink some architectural details, like the SIMD infrastructure
(ability to inline functions and enable auto-vectorization)
What would change about those features? (are those things in parentheses
not implemented? I thought that auto-vectorisation was already enabled?)
I have an important question: which version of 0.39 was devel_0_39
branched off of?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
| Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada
_______________________________________________
PD-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
