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
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
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
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
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
5 matches
Mail list logo