From: "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>
Subject: Re: Attributes 'Version and 'Body_Version
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:49:52 -0500
Date: 2001-11-07T21:49:55+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9scaa3$b7t$1@nh.pace.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: bgYJjEmY5R3$@eisner.encompasserve.org
Well, as I said elsewhere, there's no substitute for formal CM and
understanding your own software. I understand the case you are describing
and I don't think I'd expect the compiler to be able to figure out that I
reverted to some prior version of a subprogram. That's a bit much to expect
from a poor, dumb compiler!
If you need that kind of version control, it seems to me you're going to
have to apply some human intelligence and Roll Your Own version numbering
scheme. I don't see the '*Version as something to take advantage of in rapid
iterations of the EditCompileLinkRun Development Methodology - but as
something you might use in conjunction with formal CM in environments where
you have possible multiple versions of a subsystem or you are using it to
control the artifacts of what a subsystem creates. (Recording version
numbers in the output from a subsystem.)
But is it a) impossible and/or b) undesirable to have the Something'*Version
increment with every compile? It might be nice to know that a unit you are
calling is a later compile or earlier compile than the one you know about
rather than the only information you have is that it is *not* the one you
know about. You still need to be able to answer the question "What can I do
about it?". You can't do much unless you know something about what changes
happened between versions. When you *do* know what the differences are, you
*might* be able to make some use of the ordering of the versions. Just an
idea that might be useful....
MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web: http://www.mcondic.com/
"Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message
news:bgYJjEmY5R3$@eisner.encompasserve.org...
>
> Then what happens if one rolls back SubTwo to what it used to be,
> but retains the changed version of SubOne ? The result we have is
> _logically_ between the original and the first modification, but that
might
> be hard to achieve in the sort order. Or what if we make _another_
> version that has the original version of SubOne but retains the
> change to SubTwo ? How does the value of _that_ string relate
> to the value of the one whose context is vice versa ?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-11-07 21:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-11-06 20:58 Attributes 'Version and 'Body_Version Marin David Condic
2001-11-07 3:39 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-07 15:08 ` Marin David Condic
2001-11-07 20:51 ` Tony Gair
2001-11-07 16:45 ` Marin David Condic
2001-11-07 18:32 ` Vincent Marciante
2001-11-07 19:00 ` Marin David Condic
2001-11-07 23:11 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-08 17:28 ` Stephen Leake
2001-11-08 17:43 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-11-08 19:03 ` Marin David Condic
2001-11-08 19:37 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-11-09 3:50 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-09 3:55 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-08 18:55 ` Marin David Condic
2001-11-07 19:54 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-11-07 21:49 ` Marin David Condic [this message]
2001-11-07 23:08 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-07 22:04 ` Keith Thompson
2001-11-08 16:34 ` Frank
2001-11-09 3:53 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-10 0:07 ` Keith Thompson
2001-11-10 2:16 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-11-11 15:18 ` Marin David Condic
2001-11-12 23:06 ` Tony Gair
2001-11-12 21:51 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-13 8:07 ` Keith Thompson
2001-11-25 20:49 ` Nick Roberts
2001-11-26 2:30 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-26 3:31 ` Nick Roberts
2001-11-26 15:42 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-26 20:05 ` Nick Roberts
2001-11-27 3:56 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-27 17:51 ` Nick Roberts
2001-11-28 0:44 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-11-28 15:49 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-28 16:53 ` Larry Kilgallen
[not found] ` <5ee5b646.0111280749.77fabe6c@posting.google.coOrganization: LJK Software <PFcoNrf74AeG@eisner.encompasserve.org>
2001-11-29 3:49 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-29 11:52 ` Larry Kilgallen
[not found] ` <5ee5b646.0111Organization: LJK Software <Kg7U2sTGDFyI@eisner.encompasserve.org>
2001-11-30 2:26 ` Robert Dewar
2001-11-30 2:55 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-11-27 17:04 ` Georg Bauhaus
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox