1 01:54:57 *	nait (i=root@zans.eecs.umich.edu) has joined #scons
   2 17:24:40 *	stevenknight (n=stevenkn@67.218.109.115) has joined #scons
   3 17:31:08 *	GregNoel just got here; give me a sec
   4 17:31:32 *	GregNoel is no longer marked as being away
   5 17:31:58 *	Azverkan (n=chatzill@99-52-200-251.lightspeed.snjsca.sbcglobal.net) has joined #scons
   6 17:32:06 <stevenknight>	GregNoel:  np, whenever you're ready
   7 17:32:13 <stevenknight>	hey Azverkan
   8 17:32:22 <Azverkan>	hey
   9 17:33:06 <stevenknight>	GregNoel:  you probably saw, I went ahead and updated four of the 2004h2 issues that seemed like no-brainers
  10 17:34:05 <stevenknight>	Azverkan:  hit undo in the spreadsheet, looks like your first "hey" got typed in that window... :-)
  11 17:34:22 <stevenknight>	or at least I assume that's you in the upper-left cell
  12 17:35:32 <GregNoel>	OK, let's start; I'll catch up the rest as we go along
  13 17:35:44 <GregNoel>	1098?
  14 17:36:25 <GregNoel>	Azverkan, unfortunately not; my guess is that 3.0 support will be needed before the end of the year
  15 17:36:54 <Azverkan>	I mean can we make the assumption that unicode will only work in python3
  16 17:37:08 <stevenknight>	I'd be okay with that, myself
  17 17:37:31 <Azverkan>	supporting 2x unicode and 3x uncode in the same codebase seeems non-trivial to me (unless I'm missing something obvious
  18 17:38:23 <GregNoel>	I dunno.  I've been looking at Utils.py a bit and it might be possible
  19 17:38:41 <Azverkan>	the one thing I couldn't figure out was how to handle string literals
  20 17:39:01 <Azverkan>	it seemed like a non-starter but I could be missing the obvious solution
  21 17:39:10 <GregNoel>	On the other hand, I've found a couple of places where manual fixes are currently required.
  22 17:40:29 <stevenknight>	but then again i'm not running into Unicode issues
  23 17:40:29 <stevenknight>	just supporting unicode seems non-trivial to me... :-)
  24 17:40:33 <stevenknight>	Azverkan:  say more, what was the issue there?
  25 17:40:35 <stevenknight>	just the u'' syntax?
  26 17:40:37 <GregNoel>	Still no obvious direction
  27 17:41:00 <stevenknight>	yeah
  28 17:41:11 <Azverkan>	the behavior in 2.x vs 3.x is reversed
  29 17:41:22 <GregNoel>	There's a fixer for the cosmetic update; it's the cases where there's a real semantic difference that are the problem
  30 17:41:55 <stevenknight>	but we don't have to supply identical behavior when run under Python 2.x vs. 3.x
  31 17:42:12 <GregNoel>	huh?
  32 17:42:25 <stevenknight>	i.e., we can't be expect how we interpret a SConscript file to make up for Python changes, can we?
  33 17:42:22 <Azverkan>	it fails at the import level in python sometimes
  34 17:42:28 <nait>	Hey guys.  I've been working with Greg on some of the Fixer issues.  I can chat for a bit.
  35 17:42:38 <stevenknight>	hey nait
  36 17:42:40 <Azverkan>	a file that imports with  2. might throw unicode errors in 3 and vice versa
  37 17:43:23 <stevenknight>	what areas besides string literals is that a problem?
  38 17:44:13 <GregNoel>	Um, user SConscript code is either 2.x or 3.x; when the _user_ upgrades is not our problem.
  39 17:44:28 <Azverkan>	thats the only case I found where you couldn't ljust create 2x and 3x code paths
  40 17:44:34 <stevenknight>	okay
  41 17:44:56 <GregNoel>	Our problem is to be able to more-or-less do the same thing from the same code base, where...
  42 17:45:28 <GregNoel>	we work on the 2.x base and automatically convert it to the 3.x base
  43 17:44:59 <stevenknight>	then I'd be okay with separate 2 vs. 3 modules containing a catalogue of string literals
  44 17:45:14 <stevenknight>	underneath a layer that imports the right set of literals
  45 17:45:41 <stevenknight>	but that's obvious enough that it probably doesn't solve all the problems...  what else?
  46 17:46:15 <GregNoel>	We have some code in strings; the obvious ones being in the test scripts
  47 17:46:40 <stevenknight>	right
  48 17:47:04 <GregNoel>	I can imagine a startup shim that looks at the runtime and either runs 2.x base or 3.x base.
  49 17:47:24 <stevenknight>	agreed
  50 17:47:49 <stevenknight>	so are we morphing into saying that full unicode support only occurs in SCons when run under Python 3.x
  51 17:48:08 <stevenknight>	and turning this into a "how do we support Python 3.x (and keep our development process sane)" problem?
  52 17:48:02 <GregNoel>	But cases like this issue will have to have code that looks dumb but works in both cases
  53 17:48:39 <GregNoel>	by calling a utility function, the same way that the strings transparency it handled now
  54 17:48:41 <stevenknight>	hey, we have the "dumb code" thing down pretty well by now...  :-)
  55 17:49:13 <GregNoel>	{;-}
  56 17:49:26 <Azverkan>	the main problem being that all the shims slowly eat away at performance
  57 17:49:55 <stevenknight>	right, but if it's really mainly string literals, I don't think we have lots of those on critical path
  58 17:50:07 <stevenknight>	unless I'm overlooking something
  59 17:50:17 <Azverkan>	string literials i just the hardest problem to keep 2x and 3x code bases running in sync
  60 17:50:24 <GregNoel>	Yes, but they can go away eventually.  Think of isString() as an example.
  61 17:50:42 <stevenknight>	right
  62 17:50:52 <stevenknight>	so back to this issue...
  63 17:51:17 <Azverkan>	in 2x strings defaultl to ascii and you have to request unicode behavior, in 3x strings are default unicode
  64 17:51:36 <Azverkan>	so in 3x supporting unicode is more or less the "main" path throught he code
  65 17:51:18 <GregNoel>	Azverkan, that's what the fixers do; they automatically converts idioms.  You should be working with us on it...
  66 17:52:02 <Azverkan>	GregNoel: just back from taiwan, you have a branch somewhere/
  67 17:52:24 <GregNoel>	PythonFixers in the wiki
  68 17:52:10 <nait>	I might have missed something.  Do we want unicode with python2.x?
  69 17:53:14 <GregNoel>	nait, I do, for one, but that's gonna take some care
  70 17:52:28 <Azverkan>	supporting unicode in 2x is where the bulk of the work would need to be
  71 17:54:05 <GregNoel>	Azverkan, we already have utilities to make much of it transparent, but it will take some discipline to use them.
  72 17:54:36 <GregNoel>	(Well, not completely transparent, but not intrusive, at least.)
  73 17:55:11 <GregNoel>	But we're getting away from the issue, which is not Unicode transparency.
  74 17:55:38 <GregNoel>	The issue is one where the objects are really from different families.
  75 17:56:22 <GregNoel>	A code object will be `bytes` (not string) and the text will be 'Unicode' (not string)
  76 17:56:41 <GregNoel>	And ne'er the twain shall meet.
  77 17:57:12 <stevenknight>	so...  anyone want to suggest a disposition for 1098?
  78 17:57:36 <GregNoel>	Sigh.  No change from last time.
  79 17:57:43 <Azverkan>	punt until 3.0 support goes in
  80 17:57:44 <stevenknight>	and do we need some concrete next action item here for the larger 2.x => 3.x issue?
  81 17:57:56 <stevenknight>	(i.e. something that's not already part of the Fixer work you're doing?)
  82 17:57:51 <GregNoel>	All I can suggest is a 'unicode' tag and try to look at it later.
  83 17:58:15 <stevenknight>	okay, let's do that and move on
  84 17:58:38 <GregNoel>	OK, yes, I'll take it to the mailing lists
  85 17:58:43 <stevenknight>	thnx
  86 17:59:00 <stevenknight>	1098:  gregnoel to write up for ML, done
  87 17:59:02 <stevenknight>	1107:
  88 17:59:22 <GregNoel>	Steven's comment is still out of date...
  89 17:59:49 <stevenknight>	it is, isn't it
  90 18:00:25 <stevenknight>	okay, updated
  91 18:00:48 <stevenknight>	i'm suggesting 2.x p3
  92 18:00:54 <stevenknight>	hopefully 2.1 since there's a patch
  93 18:01:03 <stevenknight>	but it still needs the usual testing and doc
  94 18:01:15 <GregNoel>	I can't argue against p3, really, but I don't even know what a .pdb file does (and don't care; let's not get off on a side issue)
  95 18:01:22 <stevenknight>	any objections?
  96 18:01:45 <GregNoel>	Seeing none, next.
  97 18:01:56 <stevenknight>	okay
  98 18:01:59 <stevenknight>	1107:  2.x p3 done
  99 18:02:34 *	Azverkan I pray that someday microsoft will delete pdb files from their compiler :)
 100 18:02:02 <stevenknight>	8:
 101 18:03:33 <GregNoel>	Even though there's a common patch, I see them as separate.
 102 18:03:58 <GregNoel>	But I'll go with p3 if others think that's better.
 103 18:04:23 <stevenknight>	GregNoel:  "them" == issues 8 and 1107?
 104 18:04:43 <GregNoel>	stevenknight, yes
 105 18:05:20 <nait>	(s/Options/Variables/ for the latest versions of scons)
 106 18:05:37 <stevenknight>	2.x p3, i can take it if no one else is itching to
 107 18:05:48 <GregNoel>	OK, works for me
 108 18:05:52 <stevenknight>	done
 109 18:06:25 <stevenknight>	2310:
 110 18:06:45 <GregNoel>	2310, looneycyborg got him to use absolute paths.
 111 18:07:02 <stevenknight>	ah
 112 18:07:07 <stevenknight>	yeah, that would work around it
 113 18:07:28 <stevenknight>	does it really seem to you like he was trying to do something that shouldn't work?
 114 18:08:16 <stevenknight>	if so, I'm okay with INVALID
 115 18:08:24 <GregNoel>	I couldn't tell.  There are quite a number of things going on and the SConstruct was just too big to understand.
 116 18:08:27 <Azverkan>	its related to chdir() I think
 117 18:08:36 <stevenknight>	ah, I could see that
 118 18:09:10 <GregNoel>	I asked loony for a smaller test case, and he put it on IRC while I was gone; I haven't looked at it yet
 119 18:09:03 <stevenknight>	okay, how about INVALID with the usual "reopen with a test case if necessary" message
 120 18:09:13 <stevenknight>	he won't, but it might help someone else who stumbles on the issue in the future
 121 18:09:32 <GregNoel>	OK, works, but I'll check the test case before I do
 122 18:09:40 <stevenknight>	done
 123 18:10:02 <stevenknight>	2288:  could use a packaging guru here...
 124 18:10:07 <stevenknight>	and 2289
 125 18:10:19 <nait>	I just looked at it a little bit, and it seems to remind me of a problem I had with my multiple variant stuff that I posted a while ago. Basically, there's only one FS object, but you want two working directories.
 126 18:11:35 <GregNoel>	2289, stevenknight, concur with your comment
 127 18:12:20 <stevenknight>	do we have a likely packaging guru anywhere?  can we ask this guy?
 128 18:12:40 <GregNoel>	nait, still absorbing your statement...
 129 18:13:02 <nait>	greg, I could be wrong, since there's a lot of code there to understand.
 130 18:13:48 <stevenknight>	nait:  I'd like to understand off-line how multiple FS objects might have solved your problem
 131 18:13:59 <GregNoel>	agree
 132 18:14:10 <stevenknight>	can you send me something?
 133 18:14:16 <GregNoel>	cc me?
 134 18:14:32 <Azverkan>	directory globbng is the only issue I'm aware of
 135 18:15:02 <nait>	Actually most of it was in that thread I started a few weeks ago.
 136 18:15:02 <GregNoel>	Yeah, but dir.Glob() mostly works
 137 18:15:26 <GregNoel>	I have an issue on my plate to remove that "mostly" and document it.
 138 18:15:54 <nait>	I'll try to read this code and understand it better before I conclude that my statement has merit.  I was acutally trying to use multiple VarintDir()s at once.  That is definitely not supported.
 139 18:16:05 <nait>	(without extra FS objects being created manually.)
 140 18:16:06 <stevenknight>	nait:   understood
 141 18:16:46 <stevenknight>	extra FS objects probably aren't the ultimate right answer, because it would probably cause other problems in the current architecture
 142 18:16:46 <GregNoel>	Let's close 2289 and leave 2288 for next time.
 143 18:17:13 <stevenknight>	but using it to understand your case from that perspective would be helpful for other design discussions going on
 144 18:17:46 <stevenknight>	so don't hesitate to raise the issue
 145 18:18:00 <stevenknight>	GregNoel:  concur re: 2289 and 2288
 146 18:17:52 <stevenknight>	< 1 minute until my shuttle stop
 147 18:18:03 <GregNoel>	rats...
 148 18:18:06 <stevenknight>	yeah
 149 18:18:13 <GregNoel>	We didn't manage much
 150 18:18:20 <GregNoel>	Maybe tomorrow?
 151 18:18:21 <stevenknight>	yeah, rough set of issues tonight
 152 18:18:24 <stevenknight>	i'm game
 153 18:18:34 <stevenknight>	okay, later
 154 18:18:38 <GregNoel>	bye
 155 18:18:36 *	stevenknight has quit ("Leaving")
 156 19:34:58 *	GregNoel has been marked as being away
 157 

BugParty/IrcLog2009-02-18 (last edited 2009-02-22 19:53:46 by ip68-7-77-81)