PEG CHanges

PEG CHanges

[Noah Lavine]

Hello all,

I just pushed some changes to the wip-peg branch. They eliminate the
last remaining circularity in the module imports and then add
everything to the Makefile. It passes all tests on my machine.

This is my first time pushing something, so I hope I did it correctly.
If the patches aren't good I assume we can revert them.

Noah

Re: PEG CHanges

[Andy Wingo]

On Sat 16 Apr 2011 00:04, Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com> writes:

> I just pushed some changes to the wip-peg branch. They eliminate the
> last remaining circularity in the module imports and then add
> everything to the Makefile. It passes all tests on my machine.
>
> This is my first time pushing something, so I hope I did it correctly.
> If the patches aren't good I assume we can revert them.

They look good, thanks.  Now that we have it building, without
circularities, I would like to review it again.  Do you have time to
rebase it?  If you are comfortable with rebasing, I think we should
rewrite it to a series of N patches, one per module, adding the modules
to the build as they are added to the repo.  What do you think?

I know it seems like extra work, but it's an important module, and it
will facilitate review.  I think it's really close to being mergeable.

Regards,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/

Re: PEG CHanges

[Noah Lavine]

Yes, I think I could do that.

However, I don't think it's quite ready to merge. The last time we
talked about it, I think you wanted to change the s-expression
representation of some of the forms before we made it a public
interface. Should that be done before or after the rebase?

Noah

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Sat 16 Apr 2011 00:04, Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I just pushed some changes to the wip-peg branch. They eliminate the
>> last remaining circularity in the module imports and then add
>> everything to the Makefile. It passes all tests on my machine.
>>
>> This is my first time pushing something, so I hope I did it correctly.
>> If the patches aren't good I assume we can revert them.
>
> They look good, thanks.  Now that we have it building, without
> circularities, I would like to review it again.  Do you have time to
> rebase it?  If you are comfortable with rebasing, I think we should
> rewrite it to a series of N patches, one per module, adding the modules
> to the build as they are added to the repo.  What do you think?
>
> I know it seems like extra work, but it's an important module, and it
> will facilitate review.  I think it's really close to being mergeable.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andy
> --
> http://wingolog.org/
>

Re: PEG CHanges

[Andy Wingo]

Hi,

On Sun 01 May 2011 20:13, Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com> writes:

> Yes, I think I could do that.

Great.

> However, I don't think it's quite ready to merge. The last time we
> talked about it, I think you wanted to change the s-expression
> representation of some of the forms before we made it a public
> interface. Should that be done before or after the rebase?

Ah, good question.  I think a clean patch set will make it easier to see
what changes we want.  That's just my instinct though.  We can rebase
again afterwards too if we want.

Cheers,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/