On Fri Jun 06 20:01:51 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu Jun 05 22:21:47 2008, coke wrote: > > On Sun Jul 29 18:21:48 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [snip] > > > > > > All of the above having been said, I think what I wrote as a Comment > > in > > > the POD for this method back in December is still valid: > > > > > > "The purpose of this method is unclear. (1) It is not called > > by > > > Makefile. (2) Since internally calls read_dump(), a .dump file must > > > already exist for this method to generate meaningful output. But > > since > > > .dump files do not exist prior to calling make, this can only be > > viewed > > > as an attempt at a utility method to be called after make has run. > > That > > > might be useful. It would be responding to a request such as, > > "Given > > > these .dump files, reconstruct the inheritance trees of their > > ancestral > > > .pmc files." But that's a very different purpose from the other > > methods > > > in this program, whose point is to go from .pmc to .c > > > files." > > > > > > Does anyone actually use Parrot::Pmc2c:Pmc2cMain::print_tree()? > > > > > > kid51 > > > > The only reference I see to its use is in the book. It appears to be > > run by a user once you > > have built parrot so you can see what PMCs 'inherit' from each other. > > > > I would tend to recommend removing it. > > > > > > > Well, I figured we could salvage the code by moving it to a more > appropriate location. So I moved print_tree() out of > Parrot::Pmc2c::Pmc2cMain and into a subclass, > Parrot::Pmc2c::PMC::PrintTree, which inherits from > Parrot::Pmc2c::Pmc2cMain. Similarly, I eliminated the --tree option > from tools/build/pmc2c.pl and moved its functionality to a new program, > tools/dev/pmctree.pl -- the presumption here being that this is a Parrot > developer's tool rather than something to be invoked by 'make'. And > that meant that one of the build tools tests had to be moved to a > different test file as well. > > Please let me know if this poses any problems. I'll do some POD > touch-ups and resolve the ticket over the next few days. > > Thank you very much. > > kid51
+1; If we're going to keep this functionality, this is the way to do it. -- Will "Coke" Coleda
