[Mono-list] Re: [Mono-hackers-list] Re: Patch for mcs

[Gaurav Vaish]

> > Ok, thanks I understood the development situation. I still cannot
> > understand why your patch must be checked in right now.
> 
> Like Atsushi pointed out: there is no need to check in this code
> immediately (and am still not convinced we should).

  Hmm... ok. It may not be checked in "right now". The only reason
that I requested for it was:

  1. mcs would support "/doc", even if in sometime future.
  2. My patch currently does nothing but just collect the comments.
So, it could have been the starting point.
  3. I did not know that Atsushi is already working on this... so, I
thought I've give in my code.
  4. It would have not immediately helped out mcs in anyway unless
"/doc" was fully supported however it would have helped in mcsdoc
since I would not have required "many changes in current mcs" in my
mcsdoc repository.

  As I already mentioned, currently, I have to manually track the
changes and update the local copy of mcs in my mcsdoc repository
because the cs-parser.jay in mcsdoc and in mcs differ by huge amounts.

> 
> As an example, the generics compiler has been developed on a separate
> directory for almost a year, and we have to integrate patches every day.
> The anonymous method code lived only on my hard drive as a copy of the
> repository for six months, and I had to go through the same problems.

  Ok. But integrating that is a pain (I assume that's manual). Well,
if it's the same case at many places, I would also live with it... :-(

> I do not like the idea of checking work-in-progress code to the
> compiler, because that code tends to be bit rot if the work is not
> completed.

  Ok. Agree...

   Hooh! Going by the examples of "generics" and "anonymous methods",
I'd let mcsdoc evolve separately and once done report back with final
code.


--
Cheers,
Gaurav Vaish
http://csdoc.sf.net
--------------------