Jeff Turner wrote, On 28/06/2003 3.59: ...
I hope I've convinced you :) Certainly for simpler needs, hardcoding a LinkGathererTransformer is fine, but in general (and I hope where Forrest is going) we need the full power of a link view.
Sorry Jeff, but I don't have time nor energy to dwelve into this discussion further. I'm getting a bit tired about it too.
Don't get me wrong, it's not about you, it's just that sometimes one loses interest in some things.
So please excuse me if I won't reply to your points and I just only present MHO.
First of all, all I want is speed and less memory usage. At least the same speed we are now getting with the new CLI. If any alternative scheme can be devised to get to comparable speed and possibly memory usage, I'm *completely* fine with it.
IIUC What came out of the initial "new CLI" dicussion is that a single pass can be regarded as both technically and conceptually better.
Secondly, it seems to me that you are mixing conceptual decisions with what are in fact just implementation "details".
Things you have pointed out, like fixed gatherer position for example, are just fruit of the initial implementation, not a thorough and important design decision, and thus have still to be improved upon and testes in the real world (for us it's Forrest).
This is the sole reason why I ask you to read that thread. It explains the design decisions, and can help you in not necessarily re-investigating stuff that has already been fruitfully discussed.
Finally, the new CLI is a WIP, so I applaud your effort in getting it better, so that it does not throw out the baby (link view) with the water (3 pass generation).
I'm trying to see that in this process also the new features of the CLI (one pass gathering) are not thrown out themselves in the process of saving the baby ;-)
Ciao :-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------