[M3commit] CVS Update: cm3

[Jay K]

I understand that. I often am "like that".

But we are our own consumers. The code has probably been unused a long time, but I didn't check.

We can put it in when we need it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_ain%27t_gonna_need_it

 

 

 - Jay

 
> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:45:12 -0600
> From: rodney_bates at lcwb.coop
> To: m3commit at elegosoft.com
> Subject: Re: [M3commit] CVS Update: cm3
> 
> 
> 
> Jay K wrote:
> > Maybe remove it instead? Unused suggests untested, not working.
> 
> I am with Tony on this one. Well-designed code has always had places where
> it will handle a more general input space than current use-cases demand.
> 
> Always removing everything from what is handled reflects the view that a
> program is a one-time thing that never changes. Putting in some things
> that follow a consistent general pattern reflects the view that a program
> is an evolving thing. Excepting a very few programs that are either trivial
> or very little-used, the latter assumption is always the correct one.
> 
> Of course, you can't put everything imaginable in. But things that are part
> of a general pattern are good candidates. Nobody could _ever_ design very
> useful code, if not following this principal.
> 
> I once, in my very first job, had to rework a big test driver written in
> such a way that it handled exactly the set of test cases that had been
> originally specified and not a thing more. Nobody could add any new cases
> as things evolved. The internal structure bore no resemblance to the
> pattern of the inputs. I could only throw it all out except for some
> low-level routines and start over.
> 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > From: hosking at cs.purdue.edu
> > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 22:29:04 -0500
> > To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
> > CC: m3commit at elegosoft.com
> > Subject: Re: [M3commit] CVS Update: cm3
> > 
> > It turns out not actually to be used by m3front. But it is defined by 
> > m3middle, so let's support it and not get bitten in the arse if/when 
> > m3front ever uses it.
> > 
> > On 3 Mar 2010, at 18:45, Jay K wrote:
> > 
> > I don't see where it is used.
> > I built all of "std" with the gcc_assert(0) and <* ASSERT FALSE *>
> > (in m3back).
> > The parameters are being passed to memset in the wrong order.
> > Compare it to m3cg_zero.
> > I was actually looking to see if parameters are left to right or
> > right to left, I looked at these two examples and decided they can't
> > both be correct.
> > 
> > - Jay
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > From: hosking at cs.purdue.edu <mailto:hosking at cs.purdue.edu>
> > Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 11:02:36 -0500
> > To: hosking at cs.purdue.edu <mailto:hosking at cs.purdue.edu>
> > CC: m3commit at elegosoft.com <mailto:m3commit at elegosoft.com>
> > Subject: Re: [M3commit] CVS Update: cm3
> > 
> > Please say how this is broken.
> > 
> > On 3 Mar 2010, at 10:57, Tony Hosking wrote:
> > 
> > Huh? I see it in the front-end!
> > 
> > 
> > On 3 Mar 2010, at 10:21, Jay Krell wrote:
> > 
> > CVSROOT: /usr/cvs
> > Changes by: jkrell at birch. 10/03/03 10:21:42
> > 
> > Modified files:
> > cm3/m3-sys/m3cc/gcc/gcc/m3cg/: parse.c 
> > 
> > Log message:
> > zero_n is incorrect and never used, put gcc_assert(0) in it
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3commit/attachments/20100305/fbdd3168/attachment-0002.html>