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 

BugParty/IrcLog2009-03-04 (last edited 2009-03-09 07:58:57 by ip68-7-77-81)