On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Christian Ohm wrote:
> If the old file compiles as C++, it would be. And yes, I'd prefer separated
> commits as well if they compile and run.
It shouldn't matter if it's a separate commit, afaik, the important
part is to svn move instead of svn deleting the old one
On Saturday, 3 July 2010 at 11:54, Kreuvf wrote:
> Cyp wrote:
> > Maybe it would help if the c → cpp conversion was in a separate commit
> > than the rest of the changes?
> Although it would help, that would make the commit non-atomic and we don't
> want
> to do this, right?
If the old file comp
Cyp wrote:
> Almost-correct diff attached (a couple of comments are different than
> shown in the diff).
Thanks! :D
> Maybe it would help if the c → cpp conversion was in a separate commit
> than the rest of the changes?
Although it would help, that would make the commit non-atomic and we don't wa
On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Kreuvf wrote:
> Was it really necessary to convert this to cpp? Makes it quite cumbersome for
> me
> to get a diff of the real changes (cannot make a diff on
> http://developer.wz2100.net/changeset/11091).
>
> - Kreuvf
Yes, mainly since I didn't feel like re-impl
Was it really necessary to convert this to cpp? Makes it quite cumbersome for me
to get a diff of the real changes (cannot make a diff on
http://developer.wz2100.net/changeset/11091).
- Kreuvf
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
W
