Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Andrew Stitt <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>]

On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 03:00:13AM +0100, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> 
> Sorry Andrew, you know, no time, no time, ...

No problem, I just didn't want to leave the thread hanging open.

> It was only my idea and when nobody endorsed it I just gave up.
> I haven't resources to promote it or even implement it.
> I only think it could help grimoire gurus. If other gurus don't think
> it, no problem for me.
> 
> Perhaps users also appreciated it.
> What about users who wanted to use the latest GCC (C programmers) and
> are using stable grimoire?
> 

To be clear, I agree with you that it would be advantageous to automate
this process somehow (I think that was your underlying idea). I just am
not (currently) convinced it should be implemented inside sorcery. So
its not that I dont endorse your idea, I do, I just was asking for
justification for a particular implementation detail of that idea. I
think that is quite different from wholesale disagreement. I should have
been more clear on that, I apologize.

I think the counter-point was that testing should be done before the
spells are "distributed" to the "user" (whatever we decide that means).
As opposed to not testing and letting sorcery work out the answer
independently on every users box. The end result is the same (the spell
works). Theres certainly a design tradeoff between the two solutions. My
contention (and probably other's) was merely on that design tradeoff. Not
that we shouldn't automate gcc version compatibility testing.

-Andrew

-- 
_________________________________________________________________________
| Andrew D. Stitt  | acedit at armory.com    | astitt at sourcemage.org | 
| irc: afrayedknot | Sorcery Team Lead       |      ftp://t.armory.com/ |
| 1024D/D39B096C   | 76E4 728A 04EE 62B2 A09A 96D7 4D9E 239B D39B 096C  |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------