1 17:08:02 * Jason_at_intel (n=chatzill@bementil-116.illinois.prairieinet.net) has joined #scons
2 17:13:52 * garyo-home (n=chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com) has joined #scons
3 17:24:15 * GregNoel is no longer marked as being away
4 17:24:17 <GregNoel> Hi, Gary; I'm here, too; we can start as soon as Steven arrives
5 17:24:26 <garyo-home> Hi, Greg.
6 17:25:03 <Jason_at_intel> hi all
7 17:25:09 <garyo-home> Hi, Jason.
8 17:25:12 <GregNoel> I see you've been marking up the spreadsheet; good work.
9 17:25:25 <garyo-home> Just barely in time :-)
10 17:25:45 <GregNoel> Better than trying to do it on the fly.
11 17:26:04 <garyo-home> yup
12 17:32:04 <GregNoel> Where are you, Steven?
13 17:34:47 <garyo-home> Since Steven's not here yet, Greg I'll ask you about 2357 and ListLike. Is that mostly like CLVar?
14 17:35:48 <GregNoel> Mostly, but the devil is in the details. I'm proposing that once you mark a variable as list-like, it can't be overridden by assignment.
15 17:36:14 <garyo-home> That sounds cool, is it doable in python?
16 17:36:40 <GregNoel> (And I'm proposing a newCLVar class with slightly different semantics)
17 17:36:55 <GregNoel> Well, it's doable, but I don't yet know about fast.
18 17:37:24 <Jason_at_intel> Can i ask what teh point of CLVar is ?
19 17:37:36 <garyo-home> I do like the env.ListLike(key) rather than env['KEY'] = CLVar()
20 17:38:22 <GregNoel> My thought was to make _dict a class rather than a dict, and then use property() to catch the assignments.
21 17:38:33 <garyo-home> CLVar is a list that uses Split() to split an initial string along
22 17:38:35 <garyo-home> white-space arguments, and similarly to split any strings that get
23 17:38:36 <garyo-home> added. This allows us to Do the Right Thing with Append() and
24 17:38:38 <garyo-home> Prepend() (as well as straight Python foo = env['VAR'] + 'arg1
25 17:38:39 <garyo-home> arg2') regardless of whether a user adds a list or a string to a
26 17:38:41 <garyo-home> command-line construction variable.
27 17:38:42 <GregNoel> I've mocked up something that _almost_ works, but I haven't timed it.
28 17:39:11 <garyo-home> Greg: I see, that sounds workable (not that I understand the details)
29 17:39:41 <GregNoel> Neither to I; that's why it _almost_ works. {;-}
30 17:39:42 <Jason_at_intel> ahh.. I have been just using it as a list .. ie env['LINKFLAGS'].extend([stuff...])
31 17:39:43 <garyo-home> Greg: notice that CLVar already has quoting issues. Quoting rears its ugly head again!
32 17:40:28 <GregNoel> Yep, newCLVar is part of the SubstQuoteEscape, et.al., proposal
33 17:40:37 <garyo-home> Jason: part of the problem is that not everything is a CLVar, and the other part as Greg said is that assigning to it kills the CLVarness.
34 17:40:43 <garyo-home> Greg: good.
35 17:41:27 <Jason_at_intel> I see, will this require python 3.0 ( the need to use properties)
36 17:41:40 <GregNoel> 2.2
37 17:41:55 <Jason_at_intel> 2.2 has properties?
38 17:42:06 <GregNoel> yup
39 17:42:08 <Jason_at_intel> must have missed that
40 17:42:26 <Jason_at_intel> learn something new.. how do you say it?
41 17:42:37 <sohail> doesn't Python have the __assign__ function
42 17:42:54 <sohail> or not
43 17:42:56 <GregNoel> sohail, not on variables
44 17:42:58 * sohail goes back to idling
45 17:43:22 <garyo-home> Hi Sohail!
46 17:43:37 <sohail> hi garyo-home !
47 17:43:42 <GregNoel> Steven, where are you?
48 17:43:55 <garyo-home> the $64,000 question.
49 17:43:59 * sohail is actually now being called to DINNER!!!!!!!! bbl
50 17:44:59 <garyo-home> If Steven doesn't show up, should we just enter the consensus ones for now and reconvene later in the week?
51 17:48:00 <GregNoel> garyo-home, re Steven, yes, let's whip through what we can.
52 17:48:43 * GregNoel brb
53 17:48:43 <garyo-home> Greg: yes, it's getting late, let's just accept the obvious ones.
54 17:49:06 <GregNoel> 1752 is first; brb
55 17:49:55 <garyo-home> 1752: not obvious, but everyone seems to say 2.x p3 stevenknight so that's it.
56 17:50:49 <GregNoel> (I'm back) done
57 17:51:06 <garyo-home> 2124: azverkan ok w/ you Greg?
58 17:51:08 <GregNoel> 2124: TaskmasterNG should make it easy to use worker threads for something like this, but it should be selectable, since it's not needed on a Real Operating System(TM)
59 17:51:32 <garyo-home> worker threads may be faster in all cases though.
60 17:51:40 <garyo-home> anyway, 2.x p3 azverkan?
61 17:51:46 <Jason_at_intel> what is the issue here?
62 17:52:02 <GregNoel> Yes, Brandon should be fine, although we should check with him, since he took so long to research it.
63 17:52:04 <garyo-home> Jason: you'll have to read it, it's complicated.
64 17:52:22 <garyo-home> race conditions.
65 17:52:22 <Jason_at_intel> ok.. have threading background ( to much of it)
66 17:52:40 <garyo-home> you'll love reading the bug report then :-)(
67 17:52:55 <garyo-home> ok, let's say 2124 is done then.
68 17:52:46 <GregNoel> 1594, 1849 consensus +java
69 17:53:03 <garyo-home> greg: agreed.
70 17:53:25 <garyo-home> 1874: I'll document it, why not.
71 17:53:37 <GregNoel> done, more power to you
72 17:53:43 <garyo-home> anytime p5 garyo
73 17:54:04 <GregNoel> 1905, I think it needs a higher priority if it's going in future.
74 17:54:10 <garyo-home> 1905: is StarMerge needed for your idea, or does it just make it better?
75 17:54:38 <GregNoel> I think it should be a separate issue (in fact, split in three)
76 17:54:47 <garyo-home> If it's yours you can pick a priority.
77 17:54:56 <GregNoel> p2 then; done
78 17:55:26 <garyo-home> 1970: I don't have ideas on the keyword name yet
79 17:55:38 <GregNoel> 1970, I think we need Steven for this one
80 17:55:43 <garyo-home> ok, leave it.
81 17:55:49 <GregNoel> next time it is
82 17:56:09 <garyo-home> 2153: steven 1.3/2.0/2.1 p2, pick one?
83 17:56:26 <garyo-home> I presume he means try for 1.3, else ...
84 17:56:35 <Jason_at_intel> I think this is part of the VS revamp
85 17:56:44 <GregNoel> I like 2.1 or even 2.2, since 1.3 is already too full and 2.0 is just for the conversion
86 17:56:47 <garyo-home> 2153? I don't think so
87 17:56:55 <garyo-home> Greg: agreed.
88 17:56:58 <garyo-home> 2.1 is fine.
89 17:57:02 <Jason_at_intel> it effect the mslink
90 17:57:07 <GregNoel> done
91 17:57:21 <garyo-home> mslink uses it, but it's its own separate thing really.
92 17:57:42 <GregNoel> 2288, invalid, consensus
93 17:57:42 <Jason_at_intel> agreed on that.. I guess patches show it can be worked around
94 17:57:59 <garyo-home> 2288 invalid
95 17:58:23 <Jason_at_intel> 2288 is a misunderstand of what Install() does
96 17:58:23 <GregNoel> 2291, need Steven, since he's the 'compat' expert
97 17:58:55 <garyo-home> 2291: defer
98 17:59:02 <GregNoel> done
99 17:59:28 <garyo-home> 2351: Greg you're right it hasn't bit anyone that we know of, but still it's really wrong.
100 17:59:52 <Jason_at_intel> windows is case insentitive, but
101 17:59:58 <Jason_at_intel> case preserving
102 18:00:13 <garyo-home> I think all it needs is a _dict that has the right semantics.
103 18:00:15 <GregNoel> True, but 2.x is _very_ crowded; we have to start cutting some
104 18:00:19 <Jason_at_intel> if the case is lost certain programs can get upset
105 18:00:40 <garyo-home> jason: right, preserve the case, just case-fold the comparisons.
106 18:00:58 <garyo-home> Greg: I see your point.
107 18:01:20 <garyo-home> Maybe you're right, 3.x is OK.
108 18:01:36 <GregNoel> I don't have a WAG about how much effort it would take, so I'm erring on the conservative side
109 18:01:36 <garyo-home> Wish we had more devs.
110 18:01:59 <GregNoel> garyo-home, concur, more devs needed badly
111 18:01:56 <garyo-home> A half a day here, half a day there adds up to a lot.
112 18:02:17 <GregNoel> "A million here, a million there..."
113 18:02:25 <garyo-home> :-)
114 18:02:36 <GregNoel> Let's defer it
115 18:02:44 <garyo-home> I'm ok w/ that
116 18:02:49 <GregNoel> done
117 18:03:00 <GregNoel> 2352, consensus
118 18:03:06 <garyo-home> 2352 1.3 p2 steven (+vs_revamp)
119 18:03:28 <Jason_at_intel> Steven is workign on it.. last he said he want to factor out if statements
120 18:03:32 <Jason_at_intel> talked about how to do it
121 18:03:36 <GregNoel> Good point, +vs_revamp
122 18:03:41 <Jason_at_intel> I think he has it under control
123 18:03:53 <garyo-home> I'll be happy to help retest
124 18:03:58 <garyo-home> 2353 is really simple
125 18:04:08 <GregNoel> 2353, who?
126 18:04:33 <garyo-home> me I guess.
127 18:04:46 <GregNoel> OK, if you're sure.
128 18:05:02 <garyo-home> can't be hard, just need to get the time.
129 18:05:24 <GregNoel> "Ask me for anything except time..."
130 18:05:37 <garyo-home> Nice quote, who's that from?
131 18:05:43 <GregNoel> 2.x or 2.1?
132 18:05:47 <garyo-home> 2.x.
133 18:05:51 <GregNoel> done
134 18:06:12 <garyo-home> 2354, +toolchain and defer?
135 18:06:44 <GregNoel> 2354, yes: I'll look up what the other toolchain issues are
136 18:06:53 <GregNoel> for milestone and priority
137 18:06:59 <Jason_at_intel> why assume it exists?
138 18:07:19 <GregNoel> 2355, defer
139 18:07:26 <garyo-home> jason: are you talking about 2355? Yes, defer.
140 18:07:34 <Jason_at_intel> 54
141 18:07:41 <GregNoel> done
142 18:07:44 <garyo-home> Sorry, 2354!
143 18:07:59 <GregNoel> 2356, consensus
144 18:08:06 <Jason_at_intel> yes ... 2355 was quick to resolve
145 18:08:36 <garyo-home> 2356 agreed.
146 18:08:46 <GregNoel> done
147 18:08:57 <garyo-home> 2357, Greg I think you're the man here.
148 18:09:22 <GregNoel> Yeah, I'm afraid so, but it needs a bit of discussion. Let's defer it.
149 18:09:26 <garyo-home> ok.
150 18:11:55 <GregNoel> garyo-home, "anything except time" is Napoleon; missed the question above
151 18:12:10 <garyo-home> cool.
152 18:10:01 <garyo-home> 2358: I like the +swig keyword, otherwise 2.1 p2 swig-expert
153 18:10:23 <GregNoel> 2358, +swig, but 2.1 would need a draft choice
154 18:10:41 <garyo-home> (Might not actually require swig knowledge, just create the dir first or something)
155 18:10:44 <garyo-home> ok, 2.x?
156 18:11:02 <GregNoel> We made the +java future p1; I think that's reasonable; pull them in when the expert shows up
157 18:11:51 <garyo-home> usually I'd agree, but this issue may not really need a swig expert.
158 18:13:28 <GregNoel> I think it does require SWIG knowledge. The last patch I almost applied would have made a mess, but somebody showed up who knew that the .wrap.c file was created only if there was a certain option in the .i file
159 18:11:54 <Jason_at_intel> agreed.. the compiler can do different thing here
160 18:13:59 <garyo-home> hmm, who was that?
161 18:14:29 <GregNoel> I was looking earlier; I've lost the name.
162 18:12:48 <garyo-home> for instance, the swig builder could just get a "mkdir -p $OUTDIR" prepended.
163 18:13:06 <garyo-home> I'm not volunteering, just saying it might work.
164 18:13:21 <garyo-home> (sorry, $SWIGOUTDIR).
165 18:14:28 <garyo-home> well anyway, I guess I'm ok with future p1 +swig.
166 18:15:00 <GregNoel> Your point is good; I'm changing my mind.
167 18:15:15 <GregNoel> Give it to me as research and I'll try harder to find the name.
168 18:15:24 <garyo-home> ok, that works for me.
169 18:15:28 <GregNoel> done
170 18:15:49 <GregNoel> 2359, consensus, +java
171 18:15:56 <garyo-home> yes
172 18:16:44 <GregNoel> 2361 also needs some research, but I don't think I'm the guy
173 18:16:44 <garyo-home> 2361: my temptation is do nothing and hope toolchain removes this issue.
174 18:17:12 <GregNoel> That could work, too, but when are we getting to the toolchain work?
175 18:17:00 <garyo-home> let's defer that one for tonight.
176 18:17:18 <GregNoel> defer works for me
177 18:17:29 <garyo-home> grumble...
178 18:17:40 <garyo-home> ok defer for now.
179 18:17:48 <GregNoel> done
180 18:18:13 <GregNoel> 2362, wow, last one; it really helps to do the research in advance...
181 18:18:11 <garyo-home> 2362: I think Steven is the best one for that.
182 18:18:15 <garyo-home> So let's defer it.
183 18:18:22 <GregNoel> done
184 18:18:38 <garyo-home> ok, well done.
185 18:18:45 <GregNoel> agree
186 18:18:50 <garyo-home> I'm guessing Steven forgot about us.
187 18:19:13 <GregNoel> maybe; he did update the spreadsheet.
188 18:19:25 <GregNoel> Let's contact him and see if we can resume tomorrow?
189 18:19:38 <garyo-home> I think I can do that, especially if it's not too long.
190 18:19:53 <garyo-home> I'll email him and cc release.
191 18:20:06 <GregNoel> Should be short; I think we deferred only five issues.
192 18:20:15 <GregNoel> works for me
193 18:20:19 <Jason_at_intel> ok
194 18:20:35 <garyo-home> good. Hope to see you then.
195 18:20:59 <GregNoel> yep, see you then. I'm off to do some shopping for a party
196 18:21:13 <garyo-home> have fun!
197 18:22:10 <GregNoel> It ought to be; it's a surprise anniversary party; over 50 people from all over the country are attending, unknown to the victims
198 18:22:31 * GregNoel has been marked as being away
199 18:22:49 <garyo-home> Greg: wow, sounds amazing.
200 18:23:04 <Jason_at_intel> hope the paty goes well
201 18:25:57 * stevenknight (n=stevenkn@c-67-164-61-68.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined #scons
202 18:26:07 <stevenknight> anyone still here?
203 18:26:41 <garyo-home> Hi Steven!
204 18:26:42 <Jason_at_intel> yep.. we are still here .. greg might have left
205 18:26:45 <stevenknight> hey
206 18:26:54 <garyo-home> see my email just now?
207 18:27:05 <stevenknight> sorry for not being here, the wife has a migraine today
208 18:27:13 <stevenknight> no, haven't checked email yet
209 18:27:19 <garyo-home> ouch, they are really awful.
210 18:27:34 <garyo-home> My daughter gets them once in a while.
211 18:27:35 <Jason_at_intel> ya... my wife gets them... I understand
212 18:27:38 <stevenknight> i had to pick up the afternoon duties
213 18:27:46 <stevenknight> child pick up, etc.
214 18:27:57 <garyo-home> understood. Can we finish up the bug party tomorrow night at the usual time?
215 18:28:06 <stevenknight> that should work
216 18:28:07 <GregNoel> Wait,
217 18:28:12 <stevenknight> hey greg
218 18:28:16 <stevenknight> at least for me
219 18:28:36 <GregNoel> Hi, just happened to be passing through the office to grab something and saw you had arrived.
220 18:29:03 <stevenknight> yeah, family matters intervened; sorry
221 18:29:49 <GregNoel> It's OK; I can stay a few more minutes, but I need to leave shortly. I didn't keep a list of the issues we bypassed; did you, Gary?
222 18:30:18 <garyo-home> Greg: no, but we can find them quickly I think.
223 18:31:17 <GregNoel> 1970?
224 18:31:58 <garyo-home> My defer list from the irc log: 2291, 2351, 2354, 2355, 2357, 2361, 2362
225 18:32:28 <GregNoel> 2291, then
226 18:32:34 <Jason_at_intel> 2352?
227 18:32:39 <garyo-home> oh yes, 1970 too.
228 18:32:57 <GregNoel> More than I thought...
229 18:33:15 <garyo-home> no 2352 is done.
230 18:33:28 <garyo-home> I can do a few now.
231 18:33:36 <garyo-home> How about 1970 as you suggested.
232 18:34:08 <garyo-home> it needs a keyword.
233 18:34:44 <GregNoel> getting_started seems too long
234 18:35:07 <garyo-home> newbie not very flattering
235 18:35:22 <garyo-home> easy_contribution too long
236 18:35:30 <GregNoel> small seems diminutive {;-}
237 18:35:45 <stevenknight> "initial"
238 18:35:49 <stevenknight> nah
239 18:35:59 <stevenknight> "starter"
240 18:36:01 <GregNoel> starter? startup? initial isn't bad
241 18:36:07 <GregNoel> jinx
242 18:36:05 <garyo-home> actually I kind of like "small". It's nonthreatening.
243 18:36:08 <garyo-home> Or starter.
244 18:36:26 <stevenknight> "easy" ...
245 18:36:34 <GregNoel> Oooohhhh, yes
246 18:36:43 <garyo-home> yes, that's good.
247 18:36:48 <garyo-home> +easy
248 18:36:57 <GregNoel> done; now about the issue?
249 18:37:53 <garyo-home> what about it?
250 18:38:12 <GregNoel> anytime and draft pick don't fit together
251 18:38:48 <garyo-home> I think anytime and +easy shouldn't need an owner.
252 18:38:52 <Jason_at_intel> just read..2124... have feedback on it if you want it ( it is not install())
253 18:39:14 <stevenknight> agree w/gary
254 18:39:19 <GregNoel> it needs a schedule, so we're forced to pick someone, or a person, so they can plan it themselves
255 18:39:27 <stevenknight> for tracking purposes, create a "draftpick" user?
256 18:39:49 <GregNoel> uh. issues@scons?
257 18:39:42 <stevenknight> if it needs a schedule, is it really "anytime?"
258 18:40:06 <GregNoel> that's my point
259 18:40:08 <garyo-home> any placeholder is ok w/ me for this type.
260 18:40:42 <GregNoel> I don't like it, but I'll go with anytime+easy and we'll see how it works. Contact Jean anyway.
261 18:40:47 <stevenknight> GregNoel: i'm not following you
262 18:40:55 <garyo-home> Jason: you're right 2124 is not Install, it's an OS handle inheritance race condition.
263 18:41:05 <Jason_at_intel> it is not the OS
264 18:41:20 <Jason_at_intel> we had it out with MS on this... it something else
265 18:41:39 <Jason_at_intel> we have this problem as of today with something completely different
266 18:41:41 <garyo-home> ? If you have info, please add it to the ticket. Of course we want to hear about it too.
267 18:41:54 <Jason_at_intel> sure
268 18:41:59 <GregNoel> my point is that if you just say "anytime" and don't assign someone, it will simply keep floating out into the future
269 18:42:16 <garyo-home> Greg: isn't that the point?
270 18:42:20 <stevenknight> right, and isn't that precisely what we're trying to do?
271 18:42:29 <stevenknight> have a pool of "easy" issues that don't have names assigned
272 18:42:39 <stevenknight> as an encouragement for others to get involved?
273 18:42:48 <GregNoel> If that's what you want, I'll go with it.
274 18:43:02 <stevenknight> okay, let's go with that and see how it works
275 18:43:19 <stevenknight> if it ends up with some unforeseen downside, we can adjust
276 18:43:15 <GregNoel> 2291?
277 18:45:51 <garyo-home> Steven, 2291 needs your comments.
278 18:46:08 <GregNoel> 2291, my point is that we probably can't do a compat module without adding C code
279 18:46:42 <garyo-home> Greg: good point.
280 18:47:43 <stevenknight> is ctypes => types like cProfile => profile?
281 18:48:02 <GregNoel> I don't think so
282 18:48:20 <Jason_at_intel> I thought ctypes was a way to call a C functions in a DLL or .so
283 18:48:20 <garyo-home> no, ctypes is C types wrapped for python.
284 18:48:25 <stevenknight> ah
285 18:48:41 <GregNoel> plus calling sequences
286 18:48:58 <GregNoel> so you can wrap a function call with fairly arbitrary arguments
287 18:49:11 <garyo-home> right, all that stuff. It's very general & useful
288 18:49:10 <stevenknight> okay, the C implementation necessity probably suggests it's not a good compat candidate
289 18:49:17 <stevenknight> but I'm flying a little blind here (obviously)
290 18:49:28 <garyo-home> right, couldn't make a compat version of it.
291 18:49:31 <garyo-home> no way.
292 18:49:56 <GregNoel> http://docs.python.org/library/ctypes.html
293 18:50:07 <Jason_at_intel> I am confused... to use ctypes you have to make a c binary?
294 18:50:39 <garyo-home> Jason: by "compat" we mean could we emulate it in older python versions?
295 18:51:17 <garyo-home> For 2291 I think we should do nothing.
296 18:51:20 <GregNoel> I assume we'd want to make this change eventually, but not until 2.5 is the floor, since that's where ctypes becomes standard
297 18:51:19 <Jason_at_intel> oh.. I agree fully with that.. you would have to add the Ctype as a extra to the install
298 18:51:28 <Jason_at_intel> much like Ipython did
299 18:51:40 <garyo-home> Greg: agreed.
300 18:51:47 <GregNoel> So where do you want to put it? Future p1?
301 18:51:59 <garyo-home> Seems reasonable.
302 18:52:31 <GregNoel> Maybe with a keyword of something like floor2.5?
303 18:52:37 <stevenknight> future p1 sounds good
304 18:52:44 <stevenknight> hmm, just looking at the patch
305 18:52:53 <garyo-home> I was just thinking that (keyword floor2.5)
306 18:53:01 <stevenknight> to do a compat implementation we don't have to support absolutely everything
307 18:53:17 <stevenknight> in some cases we intentionally support only enough to emulate what we use
308 18:53:20 <GregNoel> All it takes is one
309 18:53:37 <GregNoel> C file, that is
310 18:53:55 <stevenknight> so the key question: is there anything in the patch that's not tractable in pure Python?
311 18:54:00 <garyo-home> ... such as ctypes.cdll.msvcrt._get_osfhandle.
312 18:54:04 <Jason_at_intel> is there any hope to support iron python?
313 18:54:15 <Jason_at_intel> Will Ctypes work there?
314 18:54:30 <stevenknight> good question re: iron python
315 18:54:47 <stevenknight> i'd actually really like it if we'd run under iron python *and* jython
316 18:55:33 <garyo-home> side issue. For 2291 can we say future p1 +floor2.5?
317 18:55:44 <GregNoel> I'll go for that
318 18:56:24 <GregNoel> Steven?
319 18:56:32 <stevenknight> concur
320 18:56:36 <stevenknight> still looking at code
321 18:56:57 <GregNoel> done, and I'll make it depend on 2124
322 18:56:50 <stevenknight> this is contained enough that I think we can do it with a compat layer
323 18:57:16 <GregNoel> If so, we can review it again
324 18:57:32 <stevenknight> okay
325 18:57:57 <GregNoel> 2353, yes?
326 18:58:08 <garyo-home> 2351: 2.x or 3.x? Greg is worried (correctly) that 2.x is crowded
327 18:58:36 <garyo-home> so minor things like this should be pushed to 3.x.
328 18:58:39 <GregNoel> oops, yes, 2251; skipped one
329 18:58:38 <garyo-home> Steven?
330 18:59:05 <GregNoel> or 2.x p4 or p5
331 18:59:28 <stevenknight> you mean 2351 i hope? I don't see 2251 on the list
332 18:59:33 <garyo-home> yes 2351
333 18:59:47 <GregNoel> 2351
334 19:00:06 * GregNoel isn't doing any mondo typing tonight...
335 18:59:49 <stevenknight> i'd prefer 2.x, especially if it's going to be p5 anyway
336 18:59:59 <stevenknight> yes, it's crowded
337 19:00:23 <stevenknight> but i'd at least like to consider it in the 2.x time frame
338 19:00:38 <stevenknight> and make a conscious decision to push it farther out when we (re-)categorize all the 2.x issues
339 19:00:41 <GregNoel> 2.x p4 or p5 is fine with me
340 19:00:50 <GregNoel> yes, I agree
341 19:00:54 <stevenknight> okay, 2.x p4 then
342 19:00:56 <garyo-home> ok too.
343 19:00:59 <GregNoel> done
344 19:01:13 <GregNoel> 2353
345 19:02:00 <stevenknight> 2353: +easy?
346 19:02:09 <stevenknight> eh, it's a patch...
347 19:02:24 <stevenknight> is the question who?
348 19:02:41 <garyo-home> I thought I volunteered for 2353.
349 19:02:46 <GregNoel> Wait, didn't you take this one, Gary? 2.x p2?
350 19:03:01 <garyo-home> Next on my list was 2354.
351 19:03:16 <stevenknight> 2354: consensus +toolchain
352 19:03:42 <garyo-home> ok, right.
353 19:03:48 <GregNoel> Ah, I'm blind, it's 2355
354 19:03:47 <garyo-home> 2355 then.
355 19:04:03 <stevenknight> k
356 19:04:16 <garyo-home> 2355 is -j vs. chdir
357 19:04:47 <stevenknight> decision point: do we just doc the limitation (as suggested by the issue)
358 19:05:01 <stevenknight> and open another one for greg's SideEffect() suggestion?
359 19:04:50 <Jason_at_intel> I would like a warning
360 19:05:29 <stevenknight> Jason_at_intel: agree, a warning in this case would be good, too
361 19:06:10 <Jason_at_intel> If you don't warn people will think SCons is broken with -j.. even if it is not SCon's fault
362 19:06:41 <GregNoel> The SideEffect() needs some research, but a separate issue is a good idea
363 19:07:09 <GregNoel> Let's make 2355 cause a warning; make a new one for SideEffect()
364 19:07:27 <garyo-home> ok, so make the current issue 2.x p4 stevenknight, and a new issue for the SideEffect idea?
365 19:07:39 <GregNoel> done
366 19:08:10 <garyo-home> I think 2357 is next
367 19:08:31 <GregNoel> Yeah. I need to explain ListLike() again...
368 19:09:01 <garyo-home> (We were just going to assign this to Greg but it needs discussion first.)
369 19:09:02 <GregNoel> The idea is that marking a variable as list-like means that it survives even assignment
370 19:09:46 <stevenknight> ?
371 19:10:03 <stevenknight> you mean even if I did env['CCFLAGS'] = 'foo'
372 19:10:14 <GregNoel> yep
373 19:10:25 <stevenknight> an original ListLike value of CCFLAGS would *not* be overwritten?
374 19:10:54 <Jason_at_intel> that would require a env.Replace() ?
375 19:10:57 <GregNoel> it would be reset to ['foo'] but it's still list-like
376 19:11:20 <stevenknight> wait, i think i get it
377 19:11:33 <stevenknight> it's marking certain variables as always being treated as lists
378 19:11:57 <stevenknight> so that the "list like" behavior is a function of its semantic meaning in the environment
379 19:12:06 <stevenknight> not of the fact that its value is a specific object
380 19:12:02 <GregNoel> yes, exactly, it's mentioned in the Subst... page, but not detailed
381 19:12:26 <stevenknight> agree conceptually
382 19:12:45 <Jason_at_intel> is there a prototype of this code?
383 19:12:46 <stevenknight> different variables actually do have different semantics
384 19:12:52 <stevenknight> based on what they "mean"
385 19:12:55 <GregNoel> yes
386 19:13:12 <stevenknight> being smarter about that strikes me as a Good Thing
387 19:13:19 <GregNoel> yes
388 19:13:28 <Jason_at_intel> where? and can i give it a test run for you
389 19:13:39 <GregNoel> it also makes the tokenizing, usw., work better
390 19:13:33 <stevenknight> but also potentially dangerous if we don't define things carefully
391 19:13:54 <GregNoel> yes, potentially dangerous
392 19:14:01 <GregNoel> as are all good tools
393 19:14:26 <Jason_at_intel> risk is what makes life fun :-)
394 19:15:23 <stevenknight> i could do with a little less fun lately... :-)
395 19:15:27 <garyo-home> Greg, can you prototype it?
396 19:16:21 <GregNoel> I have a very rough prototype that works _most_ of the time, but I'm still trying to figure out why it's only "most".
397 19:17:01 <Jason_at_intel> glad to look at it .. if you can share it
398 19:17:10 <garyo-home> That seems like a good next step.
399 19:17:16 <GregNoel> In my copious spare time, I can try to prepare something to show how it works, but the basic idea is simple:
400 19:17:43 <GregNoel> convert env._dict[key] into env.vars.key
401 19:18:16 <GregNoel> then property() will Do The Right Thing
402 19:18:57 <garyo-home> in that case key has to be a python identifier, but perhaps that's already the case.
403 19:19:04 <GregNoel> yes
404 19:19:43 <GregNoel> [a-zA-Z_]\w* to be precise
405 19:20:31 <GregNoel> In any event, we're spending too much time on this
406 19:20:54 <garyo-home> yes, send it around, but for now let's move on.
407 19:20:58 <GregNoel> We should either defer it or try to figure out what the next step is
408 19:21:12 <garyo-home> research, greg.
409 19:21:16 <GregNoel> works
410 19:21:29 <stevenknight> +1
411 19:21:43 <garyo-home> I think 2361 is next?
412 19:21:46 <GregNoel> 2361
413 19:22:31 <GregNoel> I think it needs some research to see exactly what he thought he was trying to do, but I don't think I'm the guy
414 19:22:38 <garyo-home> Greg & I are hoping toolchain rework will eliminate this one
415 19:23:04 <stevenknight> yep
416 19:23:16 <GregNoel> true, but I'd like to know what he thought he was doing
417 19:23:20 <stevenknight> but it would be good to document the restrictions in the meantime
418 19:23:24 <GregNoel> yes
419 19:23:32 <stevenknight> he just happens to be using a variable he named "options"
420 19:23:51 <garyo-home> I think you're right, and we reserve that name.
421 19:24:00 <GregNoel> I _think_ so, but I'd like to be sure
422 19:24:04 <stevenknight> ...without telling anyone... :-(
423 19:24:08 <stevenknight> agree re: being sure
424 19:24:34 <garyo-home> There's a lot about Tools that is imperfectly documented right now. I'm not even sure this is where to start.
425 19:24:34 <stevenknight> i'll take it if no one else wants it
426 19:24:48 <stevenknight> and ask him for a copy of his module
427 19:24:53 <garyo-home> ok, thanks
428 19:25:11 <GregNoel> OK, but don't spend any significant time on it; he may be able to just tell you
429 19:25:21 <garyo-home> agreed
430 19:25:27 <stevenknight> yes
431 19:25:37 <GregNoel> last one, 2362
432 19:25:50 <garyo-home> +easy
433 19:26:20 <GregNoel> hmmmm
434 19:27:12 <garyo-home> Steven, I was hoping you'd take that one.
435 19:27:20 <GregNoel> I'll agree to marking it easy, but let's put it in the queue to get done
436 19:27:40 <garyo-home> 2.x p4 stevenknight +easy? ???
437 19:27:43 <GregNoel> 2.x p4 is fine with me
438 19:27:53 <stevenknight> hey, i'm easy but i'm not cheap
439 19:27:58 <garyo-home> :-)
440 19:27:59 <GregNoel> {;-}
441 19:28:14 <stevenknight> 2.x p4 stevenknight is fine w/me
442 19:28:22 <GregNoel> OK, done
443 19:28:23 <garyo-home> ok, great. We did them all!
444 19:28:34 <stevenknight> wow, nice work
445 19:28:40 <garyo-home> It's late here on the early coast.
446 19:28:41 <stevenknight> and special thanks for hanging out late after i showed up
447 19:28:45 <GregNoel> Yes, and now I've got 30 mins to do the shopping....
448 19:28:51 <GregNoel> bye, cul
449 19:28:53 <garyo-home> ok, bye all.
450 19:29:02 * garyo-home has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 3.0.6/2009011913]")
451 20:57:34 * stevenknight has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep")
452
