Re: Clean up make distclean

> > Do we really need to retain backward compatibility here?

> Yes, IMHO.  I can think of several advantages (flexibility, pilot-link
> regression testing, being able to test new features on 0.12 before
> it's released without branching the code...), and the only
> disadvantage is extra code maintenance for developers.

I decided not to gut the code TOO deeply, partly because I can see the
need for it to remain in the short term, but also because I realize
you'll bear the burdon of the support/backporting if I do this. 

I'll see what I can do to fix this conundrum. I tend to build with some
pretty pedantic CFLAGS, so I'm catching quite a bit, but even without, a
stock tree will fail distclean, because the *-abs.c and friends haven't
been ported to the new API (mostly pi_buffer_* stuff). 

There's some cleanup too, in the variable names that could help. I was
wondering why pi_buf was in some places and piBuf in others: 

pi_buffer_t *piBuf = NULL;
piBuf = pi_buffer_new (0xffff);

Could just be expressed as: 

pi_buffer_t *pi_buffer = pi_buffer_new (0xffff);

Minor stuff like that. Consistent names help tracking down some of the
more-obvious buglets. I'll keep plowing through and send you a patch
after I verify that I didn't inadvertently break anything. I'm not a
GNOME person, but C is C, so that much I can grok. 

David A. Desrosiers
desrod gnu-designs com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]