[Scons-dev] Cross-language support

Wed Jul 29 17:06:05 EDT 2015

So a quick pass of the tests has these failures

Failed the following 15 tests:
        test\Batch\action-changed.py
        test\MSVS\vs-9.0-exec.py
        test\Win32\mingw.py
        test\exitfns.py
        test\implicit\IMPLICIT_COMMAND_DEPENDENCIES.py
        test\import.py
        test\long-lines\signature.py
        test\option\debug-count.py
        test\option\debug-multiple.py
        test\option\debug-objects.py
        test\scons-time\run\config\python.py
        test\scons-time\run\option\python.py
        test\sconsign\script\SConsignFile.py
        test\sconsign\script\Signatures.py
        test\sconsign\script\no-SConsignFile.py

From: Jason Kenny 
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 2:32 PM
To: SCons developer list 
Subject: Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support

Ok let me update the branch and re-run everything.

Jason

From: William Blevins 
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 10:30 AM
To: SCons developer list 
Subject: Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support

Jason,

I'm not sure.  I remember that you were helping me look into the recursive Install behavior.  Plus, possible parts incompatibility?

I haven't ran the tests on a windows box at all.  I don't expect anything new, but it should be done before it ships :)

V/R,
William

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com> wrote:

  Which MS toolchain on windows do we need tested? I can do a test run this afternoon.

  Jason

  From: William Blevins 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 1:11 AM
  To: SCons developer list 
  Subject: Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support

  Happy with it*

  Until the review is complete, and I can perhaps get a few more guinea pigs to try it out, it's hard to make a concrete projection. I have 3 items listed out that need to be given a thumbs up/down at a minimum:

  * Item #1 is still mostly outstanding.  I'm not sure how to address, please see the discussion Jason and I started a few weeks ago under the pull request comments.

  * Item #2 requires no changes (to my knowledge), but someone with more QT knowledge may say otherwise.

  * I may already have most of the patch for Item #3 (IE. no scanner for key) based on today's feedback.

  I also still need to request test runs on Windows, and for toolchains that I may not have installed or instructions to install them (EG. D).

  V/R,

  William

  On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 1:58 AM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com> wrote:

    As soon as we are happen with it :)

    On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Bill Deegan <bill at baddogconsulting.com> wrote:

      O.k. let me push 2.3.5 with the visual studio 2015 stuff.

      Then we'll changed to 2.4 merge slots. stabilize. release.

      Then this code? (2.5?)

      -Bill

      On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Jason Kenny <dragon512 at live.com> wrote:

        I have been using the slots drop for a while with Parts. I think it is ready. It does have a notable improvement in speed and memory size. I would before getting this out as officially earlier than later.

        Jason

        From: William Blevins 
        Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 8:31 PM
        To: Dirk Bächle ; SCons developer list 
        Subject: Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support

        On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:

          Hi guys,

          sorry for chiming in so late.

          On 28.07.2015 23:44, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:

            Yes, that's how we've done it in the past.  Sounds like doing it at the same time as slots would be perfect.

          Doing this in parallel with the "slots" change sounds good to me too. +1

        I'm not opposed to releasing in the same update as slots, but since the cross language code reviews haven't been finished, I don't want to delay slots since it is ready now.

        The pessimist in me as sees doing two major enhancements in the same release as higher risk; I don't foresee any issues, but its worth the thought if the release overhead isn't too bad. 

            -- Gary

            On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Bill Deegan <bill at baddogconsulting.com <mailto:bill at baddogconsulting.com>> wrote:

                Gary,

                For such a change we should bump the second digit?
                2.4?

                I agree we should not turn down a change because it will cause rebuilds where the past didn't as long as it is now more correct
                (which it should be with this change).

          Yes, "forward" is the way to go. ;)

                Also agree we should be verbose in our notification of the impacts of the new change to avoid (as much as we can) "surprises".

          I think (better: hope) we did a good enough job for the "slots" stuff on this. For the scanner changes, I see them more like a fix...so a single announcement should be sufficient?

          Finally, and just in case I haven't done so already, I'd like to thank William for all the work he's done on this issue. I couldn't help as much as I would've liked, but with Gary's support you tackled this down and brought it to a good end. Kudos to you...bravo!

        Truly appreciated.  I have spent a lot of time on this issue despite what one might expect from the number of lines of code.

        It was honestly my first time working in a "real" python environment outside of scripting, and the SCons code base is rather complex.  It instills me greater appreciation for the work that has already done.

        I also want to thank everyone here for their help past and future, but don't pat me on the back until its done. I might get lazy :)

          Best regards,

          Dirk 

          _______________________________________________
          Scons-dev mailing list
          Scons-dev at scons.org
          https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        _______________________________________________
        Scons-dev mailing list
        Scons-dev at scons.org
        https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

        _______________________________________________
        Scons-dev mailing list
        Scons-dev at scons.org
        https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

      _______________________________________________
      Scons-dev mailing list
      Scons-dev at scons.org
      https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  _______________________________________________
  Scons-dev mailing list
  Scons-dev at scons.org
  https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

  _______________________________________________
  Scons-dev mailing list
  Scons-dev at scons.org
  https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev at scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev at scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20150729/faa210d2/attachment.html>