Re: Beware of modules.

-BP> "MB" == Martin Buchholz <martin(a)xemacs.org&gt; writes: Kyle> Hrvoje Niksic writes: [... Interpolated comments from Hrvoje & Kyle removed. ...] MB> Well, I'm more guilty of random pointless improvements to the MB> code base than most, but switching src to use multiple MB> subdirectories strikes me as really going over the top. MB> Remember that there'll be a Makefile (for me (!?)) to maintain MB> in each subdirectory. So I veto this initiative. -BP> If we could find volunteers to maintain a specific chunk of -BP> functionality, then they would of course be responsible for -BP> maintaining the Makefile in their subdirectory, unless you -BP> were making some very sweeping changes, that would impact -BP> every makefile. This happens to me at work once every 6-8 -BP> months, and I can usually do it with perl. :) Speaking of sweeping changes, how compatible are Ben's "future of XEmacs" proposals with this kind of source code reorganization? The one that interests me most (Mule) affects at least 66 of 201 .c files in my current src directory, which looks to me like an argument for keeping the flat organization. (Admittedly, the way I got that figure was to grep for Emchar|Bufbyte, so you could argue that as they are already encapsulated macros, it would mitigate this kind of problem.) -- University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091 __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ What are those two straight lines for? "Free software rules."