Re: michael/wjr merge

[Rick Mascitti <acad!blitzen!rick>]

Just to let you know that some of us CroMags can read this stuff and
see red flags, here's a quick repartee to michael's quite informative
post...

(Don't take any of this as flame... We ("the Montage crew") are caught
up in our own "front end battles" even so primordal that they're not
yet on group mailing.)

> From xanadu!michael Thu Jul 19 21:13:21 1990
> From: xanadu!michael (Michael McClary)
> To: xanadu!xtech
> Subject: michael/wjr merge
> 
> The frozen version of the merge of my stuff with wjr's is in
> xanadu:/files10/michael/mjm.wjr.alf.6/*
> 
> The human-generated files are frozen.  I may delete the machine-generated
> files to save space.
> 
> My starting point was alpha-5.  Wjr's starting point was somewhere
> between alpha-5 and alpha-6, and the reference point has been lost.
> Some files from the frozen version of alpha-6 have been included.

Whoa!  Some of us Neanderthals need to know from where you've diverged.
My starting point was alpha-5 (5/8/90) and if we're talking about "basic"
changes (i.e., xpp, xlatexpp) then for some of "us" it's not so cavalier.
(or is it *arrgggghhhh* 3 more weeks of translating?)
 
> wjr, hibbert, and I are now using this as the reference point from
> which the three of us diverge.
> 
> (I note that three people working on the same chunk of code, diverging
> from a point already diverged from the main line (where at least one
> more is working on related chunks) should make the next merge considerably
> more interesting.)

Or is it hopeless?  Can I ever get a "next version" that'll Scheran
translate in finite time?

> 
> The change and regression-testing status are as follows:
> 
> xlatexpp/*:
> 
>   The source files in this directory should be only those that are
>   automatically translated from Smalltalk, without human-keyed changes.
>   Wjr does not recall making any changes since he grabbed the
>   between-alpha-5-and-alpha-6 code.
> 
>   The makefile provided did not, and could not easily, run regression
>   tests.  I added a "tests" target and ran them.  They all failed.

A real encouraging sign...

>   I have begun pursuing this with the Smalltalk crew, and will
>   continue over the next few days.
> 
>   I also plan to write a letter explaining the pattern of use I
>   intended for the regression test support.

What does this mean for we (er, I mean I) the users (er, user)?

> 
> calc/*:
> 
>   Minor but significant changes were made.
> 
>   The test passes to the same extent it did before my hacking began.  I.e.:
> 
>    - Though in a file whose name implies it is a regression test, the
>      test is actually a test-prod test, which tests only one aspect of
>      the module.  (This is not an entirely unreasonable confusion, since
>      we don't yet have a name-extension defined for test-prod tests, which
>      I though we wouldn't be using.)
> 
>    - The same reference file is used to test both the integrated and
>      server/client versions.  The integrated version passes, the
>      server/client version shows one difference: a change in the
>      report of a memory-management item in a message from the bomb
>      package.  I have not examined whether the difference is a bug
>      or a proper manefestation of the server/client mode.
> 
I've never seen or used "calc", so what... ("he ignores the above")...

> xpp/*:
> 
>   Extensive and significant changes were made.  Merging this section

Oh shit! (He says to his alter-ego.)  You can't be serious?!?!?!?
At least there aren't "significant" changes to the visible interface???
(i.e., *x.hxx stuff)??
[If this is so, you can't seriously expect your current schedules to
be valid, so I pass on any threats I may make to your person.]

>   with the alpha-sequence will be easier if I am present.
> 
>   All regression tests pass except the one for init.  Init and its test
>   are from alpha-6.  The init regression test is known to be incomplete
>   and the failure is the properly expected behaivor.
> 
> stubble/*:
> 
>   Extensive and significant changes were made.  Merging this section
>   with the alpha-sequence will be easier if I am present.
>   
>   There is currently no regression test for stubble.  Its correctness
>   might be inferred from correct operation of complete tests of the
>   garbage collector, communication (whose testbed is calc), and snarf
>   tests.  (Note that calc does not yet have a regression test, com is
>   in flux, and the cook-count on this soup has just climbed to three,
>   while snarf is still under construction.)

I don't think this affects us.  I hope not, anyway.

> 
> 	michael
> 


rick



Please note my concerns over basic interface changes, if these change,
then the whole focus of my work changes.  (And I had such good things
saved for next week's meeting!)