On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 19:27, Moritz Lenz <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/27/2011 02:33 AM, James E Keenan wrote: >> I object to this change for two reasons. >> >> First, on one platform I use, Parrot does not PASS 'make test' when I >> configure with '--optimize'. > > So there's a bug, and it must be fixed. If the fix isn't easy, I'm fine > with documenting the lack of '--optimize' as a workaround for that platform. > I don't see why a platform-specific bug should mean we should recommend > our users a slow parrot by default. I don't think slow-by-default does > parrot any good. I'd go so far as to actually make --optimize the > default for Configure.pl. > >> Second, I think a change in our README about how our users ought to >> start out building Parrot really warrants more discussion than what >> little I could find on #parrot today. > > I don't see how the need for more discussion should prevent a gradual > improvement. > >> It appears to have been a >> spur-of-the-moment decision. I think this should have been a Trac >> ticket with type RFC. >> >> I would really like to see this reverted until we can discuss it more >> thoroughly. > > If you feel strongly, feel free to revert that commit, but as I argued > above, I can't see the reason behind either of your points. > if, as you argue, it should be the default, why must it be specified as an option?
parrot users deserve better; parrot developers should do work with users in mind rather than asking them to do it. don't make users deviate from the norm in order to get normal behavior. ~jerry _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
