Re: [lmi] Calculation summary c++ code patch version0

[Greg Chicares]

On 2006-10-16 22:11 UTC, Evgeniy Tarassov wrote:
> 
> This is the patch to apply, when xmlpp_branch merge is complete.

I'm still working with that.

> I was
> not sure weither i should commit it into the new branch ' or should i
> wait until that new branch joins the HEAD one. As they say in the
> "Flying Fish technique" you have mentioned before:
> | http://computing.ee.ethz.ch/sepp/cvs-1.10-to/cvsbook/main_88.html
> |   I call this the Flying Fish technique, because the branch is
> constantly emerging
> |   from the trunk, traveling a short distance, then rejoining it.

The problem is that this flying fish is still in the air.

I don't just want to merge it. I want to understand it completely.
I have much to learn. That's why it's taking a while.

> Or maybe i should create another branch for "Calculation summary"? I
> am confused abit.

That would be a branch off of...what?
  MAIN ? No, that wouldn't work (you need libxml++), so...
  gnome-xml-branch ?
  libxmlpp_branch ?
You have more experience with this sort of thing than I do, so
what would you recommend? Also see below...

> Anyway the patch is on lmi savannah page.
> 
> https://savannah.nongnu.org/patch/index.php?5463
> 
> Please tell me if i should commit it by myself or wait for your
> confirmation/decision.

There is only one collision of any importance between that patch
and the files I'm working with for xmlwrapp --> libxml2. But that
one file is 'ledger_xml_io.cpp', the ugliest one of all, and we
are both changing the same 850-line function.

Perhaps I can refactor that function so that our changes are
independent, so that you can just check in your changes on the
'gnome-xml-branch' branch. Already there are discrepancies:

patching file `ledger_xml_io.cpp'
Hunk #6 FAILED at 189.
Hunk #17 FAILED at 724.
Hunk #18 FAILED at 825.
Hunk #19 FAILED at 869.
4 out of 19 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to ledger_xml_io.cpp.rej

but they don't look too fearsome.

Does that seem like a better strategy?

> I will continue to resolve some little issues with xml resources and
> will post updates into the same thread as the original patch mentioned
> above.
> | https://savannah.nongnu.org/patch/index.php?5463
> 
> There are number of questions/decisions to make - where do you think i
> should put it - as a reply to this message, as a different topic?
> These questions are mostly about xml resources and, as you have said
> it before, are not the priority.

Probably it would be best to use a different topic. It may
take a while before I reply to anything that's not a high
priority for the calculation summary.