Subject: Re: patch: do-again for Background Checks patch
From: Tim LaDuca (mail@timl.org)
Date: Wed Jul 26 2000 - 02:38:56 CDT
WJCarpenter wrote:
> These patches are against 072500 sources and are all XP. Tested on
> Linux.
>
> The first patch loosens up the preferences scheme a bit by allowing a
> preference value which is not in the _builtin_ set if the preference
> name begins with the prefix "debug" (case insensitive). The idea is
> that developers can use this to selectively trigger behavior that is
> really only appropriate at "develop time". Previously, you could set
> any preference value you wanted, but you got an ASSERT at preferences
> save time for items not in _builtin_. Now, you still get the ASSERT
> if the name doesn't start with "debug", but there is a UT_DEBUGMSG
> mentioning the item right before the ASSERT (so you will be able to
> correct the typo you just made :-). The patch also supplies a trivial
> new function UT_XML_strnicmp()
>
> The second patch is a new patch that mostly duplicates the patch I
> sent for background checks a few days ago. I'm sending it to make my
> kNCSL number look good. :-) It also fixes a few legitimate pieces of
> compiler lint.
> --
> bill@carpenter.ORG (WJCarpenter) PGP 0x91865119
> 38 95 1B 69 C9 C6 3D 25 73 46 32 04 69 D6 ED F3
>
After looking at this patch and thinking about the sheer size of the code, I'm
wondering... is all of AbiWord hand coded? Are there any graphical or
other tools you guys use to make sense of all this? Or does this stuff basically become
like a second language after a while? Are you able to use
Glade(under Linux) for any of this?
/TimL
Some day, I swear, I will make sense of all of this! :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Jul 26 2000 - 02:37:52 CDT