Re: Building the VM classes

2008-05-17 Thread Dalibor Topic
Christian Thalinger wrote: On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 09:45 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote: That was my understanding. Apart from making the code messier, it doesn't do any harm, it's just difficult to maintain if we don't build it with the 1.4 options. OK, I think it's a good idea. In

Re: Building the VM classes

2008-05-13 Thread Christian Thalinger
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 00:08 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote: Hi all, I recently noticed that our VM classes had acquired code that uses the 1.5 language features. As I believe we agreed to keep these 1.4-clean with respect to the language features, I've removed these. I assume we wish to

Re: Building the VM classes

2008-05-13 Thread Andrew John Hughes
2008/5/13 Christian Thalinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 00:08 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote: Hi all, I recently noticed that our VM classes had acquired code that uses the 1.5 language features. As I believe we agreed to keep these 1.4-clean with respect to the

Re: Building the VM classes

2008-05-13 Thread Christian Thalinger
On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 09:45 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote: That was my understanding. Apart from making the code messier, it doesn't do any harm, it's just difficult to maintain if we don't build it with the 1.4 options. OK, I think it's a good idea. - twisti

Building the VM classes

2008-05-10 Thread Andrew John Hughes
Hi all, I recently noticed that our VM classes had acquired code that uses the 1.5 language features. As I believe we agreed to keep these 1.4-clean with respect to the language features, I've removed these. I assume we wish to keep this policy as the only deficit is in brevity of the source