On Dec 3, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Eric Anderson wrote:
Rush Manbert writes:
I guess that I would say (looking ahead to Eric Anderson's reply to
your reply) that if you submit a patch that implements something like
cpp_verbatim in the idl, it should also implement java_verbatim,
python_verbatim, etc. because that comes essentially for free and you
don't need to know anything about the different languages. But if you
submit a patch that lets you do something cool in Erlang I wouldn't
hold it hostage to the c++ version.
Actually you still have to know about the other languages since you
have to update the generator to do something, and you have to be able
to test it. Just parsing and attaching it to the tree (which would be
easy and I could do) isn't very useful.
-Eric
Yeah, after writing the post I went and looked at the patch that
Fredrik submitted. I see that the code generation requires more
language-specific code than I thought it would. And I didn't think
about the testing part.
So sorry, you're correct. Not for free at all.
- Rush
