Dan Sugalski <d...@sidhe.org> wrote:Fine.
> At 1:36 PM +0200 5/10/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>>I think it's now time to review the code a bit and check if the
>>whole concept is sane.
> Looks OK.
>>Interesting is the dispatch inside objects. These have a delegateObjects need still further work, initializer, finalizers, and the
>>vtable which runs a PASM function. But it could be redispatched
>>before by installing an appropriate MMD version.
> I think we're going to want to think about this some. What was the
> basic vtable dispatch function that got delegated is now going to be
> the default function for the object, and I think we can leave it at
> It does mean that we're going to need to get the notification system
> in so we can catch updates to the namespaces. I'll split the event/IO
> doc I'm working on into pieces and get that out so we can hit this
TODO diamond inheritance test (hint, hint :)
>>Finally we should probably rename the VTABLE_<function> macros to e.g.Yes. Simplifies .ops file writing a bit.
> I think going with the DISPATCH_<function> macros is the way to go for this.
> It all looks just fine, so I'm all for whacking it in for the rest ofI won't have much time, 2 conferences here in Austria in the next 2
> the vtable slots and getting this done in one go.
So if someone wants to have a look at patches mmd_vtables 9 and 10 just
> After that maybe we can beat ICU into submission and cut a 0.1.1 release. :)Yep. When these nasty ICU build issues are sorted out, then its 0.1.1
Thanks for looking through it,
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.