Richard Frith-Macdonald schrieb:
I'm with Fred on this one ... certainly on partially implemented
classes, but also (though less strongly) on completely empty ones.
I think there is absolutely zero risk of someone wasting loads of time
porting only to find something critical missing... as
Citát David Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Richard Frith-Macdonald schrieb:
snip
Having a completely unimplemented class there gives us a good
placeholder for the documentation that tells people that the class is
unimplemented, and maybe what the current plans are for it. I can see
the
On 28 Nov 2005, at 09:17, Stefan Urbanek wrote:
How difficult it would be to hack autogsdoc objective-c parser to
parse GNUstep
sources and generate a list of unimplemented methods (either marked
as not
implemented or being only in @interface)? Simple html table (with
css):
| Class |
Citát Richard Frith-Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 28 Nov 2005, at 09:17, Stefan Urbanek wrote:
How difficult it would be to hack autogsdoc objective-c parser to
parse GNUstep
sources and generate a list of unimplemented methods (either marked
as not
implemented or being only
Richard,
--- Richard Frith-Macdonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm with Fred on this one ... certainly on partially implemented
classes, but also (though less strongly) on completely empty ones.
I think there is absolutely zero risk of someone wasting loads of
time porting only to find
On Nov 26, 2005, at 11:23 AM, Adrian Robert wrote: GNUstep 1.1 Integrate camaelon into gui ... I think this should be in 1.0 as a matter of practicality ... as far as I can see, this is an easily achievable target, so why not do it soon. I really think this needs to go into 1.0. Judging by the
Hi Gregory,
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
--- Fred Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
If you are a maintainer, please make any changes for your section
that you deem appropriate.
as far as I know we currently don't have a maintainer for GUI, so we all
should
Fred,
--- Fred Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Gregory,
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
--- Fred Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
If you are a maintainer, please make any changes for your section
that you deem appropriate.
as far as I know we currently
On 28 Nov 2005, at 02:17, Gregory John Casamento wrote:
Fred,
--- Fred Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I started with GNUstep, most of the
GUI classes where empty declarations, which needed filling out and
that
was what I did.
Having empty declarations is okay for something
Hi Gregory,
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
If you are a maintainer, please make any changes for your section
that you deem appropriate.
as far as I know we currently don't have a maintainer for GUI, so we all
should comment on that part. And some of us already did in previous mail
exchanges. I
Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:
1. it says current base/make/back ... but what about ms-windows support
... I'm guessing we want base/make/back fixes/improvements for windows
as it's not nearly such a good state as unix-style systems. I'm not
sure this is a 1.1 issue rather than 1.0
In my
Fred,
--- Fred Kiefer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Gregory,
Gregory John Casamento wrote:
If you are a maintainer, please make any changes for your section
that you deem appropriate.
as far as I know we currently don't have a maintainer for GUI, so we all
should comment on that part.
12 matches
Mail list logo
