[Scummvm-devel] Re: [Scummvm-cvs-logs] CVS: scummvm/scumm scummvm.cpp,1.99,1.100 scumm.h,1.84,1.85
Max Horn
max at quendi.de
Tue Dec 17 18:01:09 CET 2002
At 5:30 Uhr -0600 17.12.2002, J.Brown (Ender) wrote:
> > Hey, you should read all commit logs, also the next one, before
>being angry :-)
>
>I did :)
>But even so, *serious voice* I deeply resent the implication a casual
>reader may come to believe regarding my compitence. And the fact we
>condone violence. Zoinks! Sic him up, lil' buddy.
>
>Ahem, lets not even go into the issue of my sanity :)
>
>> And I still disagree with the reasons to keep the class name. I had a
>> good reason why I called NewGUI NewGUI back then, too. Even though
>> for me it may have been much more convenient to call it Gui and have
>> it live parallel to the old GUI. IT allowed for a smooth transition.
>*snip*
>> easily get back removed files. So there is really no good reason to
>> let debug.h etc. in there, if somebody needs them, it's a single CVS
>> command to get them).
>
>Both issues are there to make things easier (until the new debugger at
>least has the basic functionality of the old). Also I did not want
>concurrency in this situation, for three reasons:
And I answer with three questions...
> 1) The debugger is far less critical than the GUI
yeah, so why leave the old source code in CVS???
> 2) The current debugger is almost useless anyway, so concurrency is
>pointless.
yeah, so why leave the old source code in CVS???
> 3) It promotes active development of a far more useful replacement.
>NewGUI is also a far more useful replacement, but OldGUI was at least
>functionally useful. The old debugger isn't.
Yeah so why leave the old source code in CVS?
Max
--
-----------------------------------------------
Max Horn
Software Developer
More information about the Scummvm-devel
mailing list