Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-sorcery - Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery

sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Sorcery related topics

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Sergey A Lipnevich <sergeyli AT pisem.net>
  • To: Ryan Abrams <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>
  • Cc: sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org, sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery
  • Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:34:19 -0400

All of CONFIGURE files that I remember depended only on $SPELL_CONFIG being set, so everything will work out quite OK I think. What is long overdue though is some simple APIs for CONFIGURE, so that people don't accidentally use `>' instead of `>>' ;-). The functions that CONFIGURE accomplishes are a) determine if the option is set; and b) ask for it if it's not; right? Most of the choice situations are handled by y/n questions, but once I needed a tri-state choice, in httpd-dev. I'm sure you know that, just trying to see if there's anything missing from this description.

Thanks!
--Sergey.

Ryan Abrams wrote:

$SPELL_CONFIG is set in codex_set_spell_by_name, which is the function
called to source DETAILS as well (all in libcodex) - it is actually set
PRIOR to sourcing DETAILS (already was this way) and is set to the value:

$DEPENDS_CONFIG/$SPELL

where $DEPENDS_CONFIG is the directory that stores all the configuration
info for spells.

In other words, it's already handled.

The way the process works at the moment is that config is run, saving values
to SPELL_CONFIG. DETAILS is then run which sources SPELL_CONFIG to get those
values (unneccessarilly if we choose the switch) - one of the things that i
havent done yet is to move the sourcing from pre-DETAILS to pre-CONFIGURE.
Doing that will cause CONFIGURE not to prompt for config options that are
set. (or it should in a well written CONFIGURE). If I get positive replies
about the state of the spells, i will go ahead and fully implement it.

In fact, maybe I will just do that now, and send a patch to the list so
people can test their spells...

-Ryan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sergey A Lipnevich" <sergeyli AT pisem.net>
To: "Ryan Abrams" <rabrams AT sourcemage.org>
Cc: <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>; <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: [SM-Sorcery]RFC: Somewhat major change in sorcery



How can you handle setting $SPELL_CONFIG without running DETAILS?

Ryan Abrams wrote:


Hey all,

I am writing to ask about something I think may add a lot of
flexibility to spellwriting. Its a rather big change in cast.

Lets run CONFIGURE /before/ running DETAILS.

The sorcery code seems to support this.

The main concern I have is twofold:

1) Do spells rely on DETAILS for their CONFIGURE to work? I /know/
mozilla and vim don't, because I have succesfully cast them on the
modified version. But if your's does, let me know ASAP.

2) What haven't I thought of here? What else could break? What do we
have that assumes a certain order?

In any case, this is a big change design wise (though small code-ise),
and may not be a good one. I am holding off committing it to cvs until
I hear back from some people. In the meantime, I will run with it on
my system, and report any problems I find.

-Ryan

_______________________________________________
SM-Sorcery mailing list
SM-Sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery


_______________________________________________
SM-Sorcery mailing list
SM-Sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery









Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page