[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