On Wed Sep 30 0:53 , "Weddington, Eric" sent: >I don't care how the project progresses, meaning that I don't have any say in architecture or direction, or how a particular feature should be implemented. My only personal concern is that it continues to build for, and run on, Windows either Cygwin or MinGW (preferrably MinGW). I think that no one wants that the project go "backwards", meaning that it continues to build on the same platforms, that there aren't any serious regressions. Yes, I understand that there is very little testing in place to ensure this, so I have to trust that the developers keep this in mind when working on this project.
Portability issues shouldn't be too much of a problem. The sockets and the guis are the most likely prospects. Most of the rest is just a matter of doing the math. >This is why I'm more than happy to add people to the project as developers or admins, as long as these overarching goals are kept in mind. I don't think that consensus would be that hard to reach in getting features added. One of the features I would like to add is regression tests for IN and OUT. They will need to be cpu-dependent. They will access the port registers. Do the savannah code and the Onno code use the same regression test organization? IIRC the Onno code uses a different port register access syntax from the savannah code. If so, I'd like a discussion about whether to commit it to the savannah code. -- Michael Hennebry [email protected] "War is only a hobby." ---- Msg sent via CableONE.net MyMail - http://www.cableone.net _______________________________________________ Simulavr-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/simulavr-devel
