00:00.20 |
starseeker |
anyhow, enough for 1 day |
00:00.23 |
starseeker |
packs it in |
00:06.33 |
*** join/#brlcad gcibot
(~gcibot@unaffiliated/ignaciouy/bot/gcibot) |
00:38.40 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD Wiki:Tbrowder * 6424
/wiki/Main_page: /* Tutorials */ |
00:48.07 |
*** join/#brlcad KimK
(~Kim__@ip24-255-223-153.ks.ks.cox.net) |
01:05.41 |
*** join/#brlcad FreezingAlt
(~FreezingC@135.0.41.14) |
01:37.46 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD Wiki:Sean * 6425 /wiki/Main_page:
dev topic, belongs in dev doc section |
02:07.44 |
brlcad |
``Erik: guess what I got up and
running? |
02:07.58 |
brlcad |
(assuming you didn't see my earlier
note) |
02:09.01 |
brlcad |
starseeker: we detect it in a couple places,
but I don't know of an API means to detect it |
02:10.52 |
brlcad |
about all I recall on the topic is that it is
intentionally not prevented, long time since I've thought about a
cyclic DAG |
02:11.27 |
brlcad |
(it isn't prevente, but it IS a modeling
error) |
02:16.01 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59769
brlcad/trunk/src/rt/opt.c: instead of introducing another _WIN32
that breaks regression, pull it down to where it's used. |
02:32.52 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59770
brlcad/trunk/src/libbu/tests/test_funcs.c: stdio.h isn't needed
when we include bio.h, but bio does belong up with the system
headers as a convenience wrapper. |
02:51.39 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59771
(brlcad/trunk/src/liboptical/sh_stxt.c
brlcad/trunk/src/liboptical/sh_text.c and 3 others): prefer API
simplicity over an inconsequential division instruction reduction
since there are no other pertinent, preventive, or semantic
benefits and it's an odd one-off API symbol |
03:09.26 |
starseeker |
brlcad: problem for me is it can result in an
infinite loop in search |
03:09.49 |
starseeker |
was hoping there was an easy way to spot the
issue... |
03:10.09 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59772
brlcad/trunk/src/liboptical/sh_text.c: division is not associative,
wrap in parens |
03:11.47 |
starseeker |
there is _db_detect_cycle, but it's not
public |
03:12.19 |
starseeker |
should I just duplicate the logic? |
03:12.26 |
starseeker |
pretty simple, actually... |
03:13.27 |
starseeker |
or could make a public function and have
_db_detect_cycle call it... |
03:18.41 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59773
brlcad/trunk/src/liboptical/sh_wood.c: another BN_INV255 going bye
bye |
03:24.41 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59774
brlcad/trunk/include/bn.h: remove the BN_INV255 symbol from bn API
as it was the sole remaining global conversion that got preserved
(and wasn't a math constant). serves no useful purpose so prefer
API simplicity. |
03:24.47 |
brlcad |
starseeker: ditto for a number of other
commands too |
03:25.31 |
brlcad |
heh .. you didn't just ask if you should
duplicate logic....... |
03:28.26 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59775 brlcad/trunk/CHANGES:
no more bn_inv255/BN_INV255, unnecessary |
03:31.31 |
starseeker |
brlcad: it's a dinky little function to make a
public API out of |
03:31.57 |
starseeker |
plus, to *really* do a general function, it
should do a full inspection of the path |
03:32.14 |
starseeker |
or maybe allow the user to specify how far
back from the end... |
03:32.14 |
starseeker |
hmm |
03:38.42 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 59776
brlcad/trunk/src/librt/search.c: This fixes the infinite loop in
search on cyclic paths - need to make the cycle detection into a
librt function. |
03:41.30 |
brlcad |
starseeker: the fact that the same logic is
needed in two places means "it's now time to refactor" |
03:42.07 |
starseeker |
brlcad: it just seemed like something that
would have been needed in a large number of places a long time ago,
if cyclic paths are allowed... |
03:42.25 |
starseeker |
suggesting there was some reason it hadn't
already been attended to ;-) |
03:42.34 |
starseeker |
no matter - give me a few minutes |
03:42.40 |
starseeker |
this shouldn't be too hard |
03:42.57 |
brlcad |
not preventing != allowed |
03:43.37 |
brlcad |
you're not prevented from shooting yourself
... doesn't mean it's allowed |
03:43.40 |
starseeker |
<snort> fair enough, but if the *can*
exist then we should be making sure they don't turn into poison
pills... |
03:44.28 |
starseeker |
can I delete all these D B _ F U L L _ P A T
H... strings in the header? |
03:44.48 |
starseeker |
thought he recalled you
saying they were out in the headers but not the C
files... |
03:45.44 |
brlcad |
the spaced out titles can be
eliminated |
03:45.50 |
starseeker |
huzza |
03:46.01 |
brlcad |
they're not supposed to reside in headers
either |
03:47.47 |
brlcad |
starseeker: note that you can avoid publishing
it as public API, just expose a common function and put it in
librt_private.h |
03:48.06 |
brlcad |
just without rt_ or db_ or similar public api
prefix |
03:48.16 |
starseeker |
brlcad: sure, if only librt ever
cares |
03:48.20 |
brlcad |
right |
03:48.33 |
starseeker |
wouldn't libged, mged, etc. have a potential
interest in that question? |
03:48.35 |
brlcad |
the time something outside needs it, it'll be
time to sort out the public API |
03:48.44 |
brlcad |
don't know that |
03:49.01 |
brlcad |
could be the case that it's really the rt_/db_
functions that always need to check so it's never an
issue |
03:49.11 |
starseeker |
nods |
03:49.24 |
brlcad |
would need a case |
03:50.06 |
starseeker |
would think Archer's tree
display would like to know... |
03:50.16 |
brlcad |
wouldn't expose it on hypothetical alone, we
can expand/publish as needed without issue so long as the
visibility is as constrained as possible |
03:51.20 |
brlcad |
sure, but still would it be a db_detect_cycles
function or even something like it? I'd guess probably
not |
03:53.58 |
brlcad |
e.g., you'd probably want to do more than
boolean detect, for example, you'd want a list of paths where a
cycle exists, or a list of object names that begin a cycle, or ...
who knows what else |
03:57.32 |
brlcad |
really looks like db_cyclic_path() should get
merged with _db_detect_cycle() (probably shouldn't have that
prefix too) |
03:58.11 |
starseeker |
yeah, I know they should be merged - just
didn't want to scrap the change when it did fix the bug |
03:58.39 |
starseeker |
is working on it - I'll put
it in the private header to start |
03:58.49 |
brlcad |
coo |
03:58.56 |
brlcad |
so you actually encountered one? |
03:59.03 |
brlcad |
or created one to test? |
03:59.06 |
starseeker |
wonders if there are any tree
walking operations where we *don't* want to make that
check? |
03:59.09 |
starseeker |
made one by accident |
03:59.15 |
brlcad |
ahh |
03:59.28 |
starseeker |
was making screwy combs to test the assembly
checking logic, and *kaboom* |
03:59.36 |
starseeker |
hellow infinite loop |
04:02.39 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 59777
brlcad/trunk/include/raytrace.h: Remove some of the spaced-out
names in raytrace.h - this isn't all of them. Deliberately left
some where there was no other comment as an indication that we
should add something, but even without those still plenty to
go. |
04:02.49 |
brlcad |
it's not our "new era" methodology, but the
old mantra was you make that kind of mistake, you deal with it
;) |
04:02.59 |
starseeker |
heh |
04:03.00 |
brlcad |
you want to shoot yourself, that's your
business |
04:03.12 |
starseeker |
oddly enough, I *am* dealing with it
:-P |
04:03.16 |
brlcad |
whether by accident or not, no
coddling |
04:08.14 |
brlcad |
starseeker: if you want a fun exercise, you
could try to automate the elimination of the S P A C E D out names
and the blank line that follows in comments |
04:09.11 |
starseeker |
nods - I know I should script
it. Just got into a vim cycle of removing them "just one
more..." |
04:09.53 |
brlcad |
can probably do it with one regex |
04:09.55 |
starseeker |
is it a good rule of thumb that all public API
functions should have some sort of explanatory comment? |
04:10.07 |
starseeker |
shudders at the mere mention
of regex... |
04:10.22 |
brlcad |
names will have at least three chars if not
many more |
04:10.37 |
brlcad |
that's what makes it a great (learning)
exercise |
04:10.58 |
starseeker |
would rather merge the cycle
tests ;-) |
04:11.00 |
brlcad |
not really that hard, you just need to look up
how to do a multiline match, then find your pattern |
04:11.05 |
brlcad |
heh |
04:11.10 |
brlcad |
just a suggestion |
04:11.29 |
brlcad |
would have made a good gci task |
04:11.34 |
brlcad |
simple enough |
04:12.10 |
starseeker |
has occasionally done regexes
of that type - it's how I invented Yapp's First Law of Regex
Expressions - There are ALWAYS untended consequences when doing
regex matches |
04:12.32 |
starseeker |
s/untended/unintended |
04:12.40 |
brlcad |
that just means you haven't done enough of
them to think through all the cases! |
04:12.40 |
starseeker |
apparently can't code and
talk at the same time... |
04:13.10 |
brlcad |
it's a good assumption to make regardless, but
it does get easier |
04:16.31 |
starseeker |
"if shooting your foot still hurts, it just
means you haven't done it enough!" |
04:17.22 |
starseeker |
knows brlcad is right, but
still has a hunch he needed to be exposed to some fundamental
"prepare the brain for regexes" program at age 3 and
wasn't.. |
04:17.32 |
starseeker |
even pointers aren't as bad |
04:18.14 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59778
brlcad/trunk/src/sig/d2-c.c: this is why bio.h exists |
04:32.10 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 59779
(brlcad/trunk/src/librt/db_fullpath.c
brlcad/trunk/src/librt/db_tree.c and 2 others): Consolidate the
cyclic tests |
04:37.11 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:starseeker * 59780
brlcad/trunk/src/librt/search.c: Go ahead and return the cyclic
path itself - it's the traversal that's the problem. |
07:01.37 |
brlcad |
couldn't resist after talking
about it |
07:04.56 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59781
(brlcad/trunk/doc/html/ReleaseNotes/email3.0.html
brlcad/trunk/doc/html/ReleaseNotes/email4.0.html and 457 others):
Eliminate our historic F U N C _ H E A D E R S in comments. They're
a development nuisance with a maintenance cost and their original
purpose is no longer relevant. There's no longer a need to
distinguish public API comments from implementation function
comments since all API |
07:04.57 |
Notify |
comments are getting migrated to the include/
directory. Moreovere, we have automatic tools (e.g., Doxygen) that
can stylize and headerize automatically.Done with two easy
one-liners:find . -type f \( -not -regex '.*other.*' -not -regex
'.*svn.*' \) -exec perl -0777 -pi -e 's/
\*[[:space:]]*([[:alnum:]_]
)+[[:alnum:]_]([[:space:]]*\([[:space:]]*\))*(\n
\*[[:space:]]*)*\n//g' {} \;find . -type f \( -not -regex |
07:05.00 |
Notify |
'.*other.*' -not -regex '.*svn.*' \) -exec
perl -0777 -pi -e
's/\/\*+[[:space:]]*(\n[[:space:]]*\*[[:space:]]*)*\n[[:space:]]*\*\/[[:space:]]*\n//g'
{} \;5900 lines eliminated including empty comment
blocks. |
07:09.48 |
brlcad |
took about 15 minutes to write them, and an
hour to review them |
07:50.55 |
*** join/#brlcad
ARNOLD-TELECOM (~ARNOLD-TE@195.24.220.134) |
07:51.15 |
ARNOLD-TELECOM |
hi Ch3ck |
07:51.28 |
ARNOLD-TELECOM |
help |
07:52.54 |
ARNOLD-TELECOM |
-? |
07:53.12 |
ARNOLD-TELECOM |
--help |
07:54.05 |
*** join/#brlcad
ARNOLD-TELECOM (~ARNOLD-TE@195.24.220.134) |
07:55.39 |
ARNOLD-TELECOM |
whois ChanServ |
08:02.16 |
*** join/#brlcad
ARNOLD-TELECOM_ (~ARNOLD-TE@195.24.220.134) |
08:02.20 |
*** join/#brlcad Anaphaxet0n
(~george@unaffiliated/anaphaxeton) |
08:02.51 |
*** join/#brlcad kesha
(~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
09:03.29 |
*** join/#brlcad gaganjyot
(~gagan@124.253.224.225) |
09:28.49 |
*** join/#brlcad merzo
(~merzo@user-94-45-58-138-1.skif.com.ua) |
09:40.04 |
*** join/#brlcad gaganjyot
(~gagan@124.253.225.115) |
09:48.26 |
*** join/#brlcad Anaphaxeton
(~george@unaffiliated/anaphaxeton) |
10:00.52 |
*** join/#brlcad Anaphaxeton
(~george@unaffiliated/anaphaxeton) |
11:03.43 |
*** join/#brlcad zxq9
(~ceverett@FL9-125-199-207-150.okn.mesh.ad.jp) |
11:06.54 |
*** join/#brlcad Ch3ck
(~Ch3ck@195.24.220.134) |
11:13.14 |
*** join/#brlcad merzo
(~merzo@user-94-45-58-138-1.skif.com.ua) |
11:33.34 |
*** join/#brlcad kanzure
(~kanzure@131.252.130.248) |
11:50.53 |
*** join/#brlcad KimK
(~Kim__@ip24-255-223-153.ks.ks.cox.net) |
12:02.52 |
*** join/#brlcad kesha
(~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
12:05.59 |
*** join/#brlcad caen23
(~caen23@92.81.213.198) |
12:10.47 |
``Erik |
brlcad: ? |
12:30.08 |
starseeker |
brlcad: this word "easy" - I don't think it
means what you think it means :-P |
12:30.18 |
starseeker |
nice little line count reduction |
12:57.50 |
starseeker |
we are keeping the spaced-out file name at the
top of the headers? |
12:59.36 |
starseeker |
brlcad: while I'm thinking about it, you have
mentioned in the past an interest in breaking the large headers in
include up into smaller headers (which are then presumably
#included back into the parent file for compatiblity) |
13:00.11 |
starseeker |
what would be the scheme you would use to
structure that? include/librt/*.h and friends? |
13:00.31 |
starseeker |
(or include/raytrace/*.h I
suppose...) |
13:05.55 |
brlcad |
``Erik: ? |
13:06.50 |
starseeker |
I think he's asking about your "guess what I
got working" remark earlier? |
13:06.52 |
brlcad |
starseeker: heh, well it's really not that
complicated |
13:07.09 |
brlcad |
it's just a shorthand notation for a very very
simple program |
13:07.35 |
brlcad |
especially if you eliminate all of the
character classes (the [:whatever:] bit) |
13:08.12 |
brlcad |
s/eliminate/reduce/ |
13:09.18 |
``Erik |
brlcad: you got something running? |
13:09.25 |
brlcad |
ah yes .. yes I did :) |
13:09.43 |
brlcad |
it's about the size of a breadbox |
13:09.47 |
brlcad |
it's blue |
13:09.55 |
``Erik |
oh, the o2? |
13:09.58 |
brlcad |
yup |
13:10.02 |
``Erik |
saw something about that a few days
ago |
13:10.07 |
brlcad |
took a bit to figure out how to root
it |
13:10.16 |
brlcad |
none of the old roots worked |
13:10.26 |
``Erik |
heh, running irix 7.something from 1998?
:D |
13:10.51 |
brlcad |
7?? |
13:10.58 |
brlcad |
what is this mythical beast you speak
of? |
13:11.02 |
brlcad |
it's an old 6.5 |
13:11.06 |
``Erik |
ah |
13:11.20 |
``Erik |
6.5.30 was the last release in '06 |
13:11.32 |
``Erik |
was never much of an irix
guy, was more at home with solaris |
13:11.32 |
brlcad |
yeah |
13:12.07 |
``Erik |
but the o2 was an absolutely brilliant
bookend, good weight, solid rubber feet, visually pleasing
shape |
13:12.08 |
brlcad |
it was frozen in time, circa 2002 |
13:12.33 |
brlcad |
it's up and running and have been slowly
making progress on a compile all week |
13:12.44 |
``Erik |
(and, um, the o2 creator and the o3, iirc,
minor updates with color changes) |
13:12.52 |
brlcad |
has cad 6.0 installed already |
13:13.02 |
``Erik |
cool, did a cmake work, or still
auto? |
13:13.15 |
brlcad |
cmake worked without fuss |
13:13.29 |
brlcad |
biggest issues so far are
C++-related |
13:13.34 |
``Erik |
swank |
13:14.03 |
brlcad |
put mipspro on halt after it had no stl to
work with |
13:14.18 |
brlcad |
but then the gcc installed is 2.95 so it's all
kinds of special too |
13:14.52 |
``Erik |
um, iirc, sgi put out stl as an optional
add-on (in the late 90's, it was common for msvc users to grab the
sgi stl, because it was the least bad out there) |
13:14.54 |
brlcad |
just burnt a 3.3 and stl to put on there for
next week, but it will mean starting over |
13:15.11 |
brlcad |
nods, got
that |
13:15.22 |
brlcad |
their stl used to be my go-to stl
documentation (sometimes still is) |
13:15.43 |
brlcad |
I made a wget copy of their site years ago
when the company started crumbling |
13:15.58 |
brlcad |
fortunately haven't needed to use it |
13:16.25 |
``Erik |
heh, "hey, I'm a new ceo! forget this mips
crap, the money is in nt! let's make a basic NT workstation and try
selling it for 10x everyone elses rate! it'll be awesome!"
*cough* |
13:16.39 |
brlcad |
yeah.. |
13:18.22 |
``Erik |
the mips isa was awesome, did some asm using
'spim' http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~larus/spim.html
back in college, soooo much nicer than x86 |
13:19.29 |
starseeker |
leaves off on yet another API
reduction re-design of the db_search stuff to emissions test a
car... |
13:19.31 |
``Erik |
aaaanyway, as neat as the o2 is, not sure the
time wouldn't be better spent bumping from c90 to c99 or updating
to tcl 86 |
13:27.47 |
*** join/#brlcad kanzure
(~kanzure@131.252.130.248) |
13:45.27 |
brlcad |
``Erik: this isn't just for fun, I'm
evaluating where our performance stands compared to where it was a
decade before |
13:45.53 |
brlcad |
to see if we're significantly faster or
slower |
14:56.47 |
``Erik |
no old #'s for something like xon/xoff to do
an easier comparison? :) |
14:58.35 |
``Erik |
I kinda feel compelled to point out that using
a different compiler can yeild radically different performance
profiles, 2.95 was very micro-optimized for x86, 3 was
significantly slower code, but by 3.4, it was tromping 2.95 on x86
as well as other platforms... :) |
14:59.06 |
``Erik |
(and the 2.95 egcs branch was even
crazier) |
15:03.19 |
*** join/#brlcad kesha
(~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
15:24.35 |
*** join/#brlcad gaganjyot
(~gagan@124.253.225.70) |
16:34.29 |
*** join/#brlcad gaganjyot
(~gagan@124.253.225.70) |
17:12.27 |
*** join/#brlcad gaganjyot
(~gagan@124.253.225.70) |
17:16.51 |
*** join/#brlcad javampire
(~ncsaba@p4FF7294D.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) |
17:38.53 |
javampire |
kanzure: I have some questions regarding
python-brlcad... |
18:10.20 |
*** join/#brlcad kesha
(~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
18:34.20 |
kanzure |
javampire: sup |
18:35.53 |
javampire |
kanzure: first I would like to ask if you had
any reason to use '_bindings' instead of just 'bindings'
? |
18:36.35 |
javampire |
the '_' suggests it's a private package, but
it's actually not, applications will need to use it |
18:36.59 |
kanzure |
in python _ just means "please pretend it is
private" |
18:37.06 |
kanzure |
i don't see why applications would need to use
it |
18:37.18 |
kanzure |
supposedly python-brlcad would wrap _bindings
into something else that would be consumable by humans |
18:37.35 |
javampire |
aha, now that's a good reason :-) |
18:38.25 |
javampire |
but for the moment that's unfortunately not
true, and I think it will take quite some time to get
there... |
18:38.52 |
kanzure |
which application needs to access
brlcad._bindings? |
18:39.21 |
javampire |
anyway, I tried to silence my IDEs warnings by
adding those packages directly under the "brlcad" package, but I
will revert that then |
18:39.44 |
kanzure |
i recommend not using an IDE because it
complicates things |
18:39.53 |
kanzure |
but i wont insist.. |
18:40.16 |
javampire |
well I have different experience with IDEs,
for now it helps me do things faster |
18:40.38 |
javampire |
I also have quite extensive experience using
IntelliJ, and Pycharm is just it's python variant |
18:41.38 |
javampire |
it's warnings did actually help me find quite
some bugs |
18:42.31 |
javampire |
OK, the "_" question is answered with that,
thanks |
18:42.48 |
javampire |
I have another one related to building
combinations |
18:42.50 |
kanzure |
are you still manually testing by reinstalling
the package? |
18:42.59 |
kanzure |
let me see what i can do about this |
18:43.08 |
javampire |
well it's not a big deal |
18:43.21 |
kanzure |
it is :) |
18:43.27 |
javampire |
I run the "setup.py", takes a few seconds
:-) |
18:43.33 |
javampire |
what can be done about it ? |
18:43.42 |
kanzure |
installing the python package is secondary
from testing the binding generation stuff |
18:43.51 |
kanzure |
well it's important to have a separation of
concerns |
18:44.00 |
javampire |
well binding generation is working now, I
don't need to test it |
18:44.11 |
kanzure |
updating bindings shouldn't require a
programmer to know anything about python packaging magic (which, by
the way, is universally terrible and awful) |
18:44.21 |
kanzure |
(except maybe for wheels, but i haven't looked
into this much) |
18:44.55 |
kanzure |
ctypesgen.txt seems weird- what is
this |
18:45.04 |
javampire |
well the bindings are re-generated only
because the wrapper package is the same as the bindings
package |
18:45.29 |
javampire |
ah, that one was only to record my finding
about the ctypes-gen bug |
18:45.49 |
kanzure |
you could just submit changes upstream to
https://github.com/kanzure/ctypesgen
and then we bump the dependency/version in
requirements.txt |
18:46.27 |
javampire |
ctypes-gen can wrongly include some
unsupported typedefs if there are circular dependencies |
18:46.53 |
javampire |
but once the "no-python-types" option is set
to False, that won't affect anymore python-brlcad |
18:46.57 |
kanzure |
what is the difference between test/ and
tests/ |
18:48.03 |
javampire |
tests is the unit tests created by you, test
is the one created by me with some scripts I check for running at
all |
18:48.11 |
javampire |
and I used for debugging |
18:48.24 |
kanzure |
yes but what is the actual
difference |
18:48.32 |
kanzure |
like why should there be two? |
18:48.46 |
javampire |
once things stabilize, it can be either moved
to tests as unit tests, or just dropped altogether, or perhaps
moved to the examples |
18:49.08 |
javampire |
unit tests are simple things which test one
element |
18:49.20 |
javampire |
the tests has a full round-trip |
18:49.43 |
javampire |
I mean the test/test_wdb.py for
example |
18:50.37 |
javampire |
everything is mostly work in progress for the
moment, I experiment a lot |
18:50.57 |
javampire |
but yes, i'm glad for any questions/comments
! |
18:51.56 |
javampire |
before I will go ahead with implementing more
primitive wrappers, I want to get combination read/write working
well, because the actual details there can influence how the rest
needs to be implemented |
18:53.28 |
javampire |
when creating a combination a tree of boolean
operations will need to be created |
18:54.22 |
javampire |
that can be done in many ways, but I would
prefer to use expressions involving primitive instances connected
by properly overloaded operators |
18:55.04 |
javampire |
and the actual question is: do you have
preferences for which operators to assign to which boolean
operation |
18:56.47 |
javampire |
if I would use the operators overloaded by set
operations in python, it would mean: '|' -> union; '&' ->
intersection; '-' -> difference; '^' -> xor |
19:20.11 |
brlcad |
``Erik: yep, that's why recompiling 6.0 is
already in order, but the existing install still gives me a known
baseline |
19:20.37 |
brlcad |
compiling 6.0 should be a snap |
19:30.58 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59782
(brlcad/trunk/doc/html/ReleaseNotes/email4.0.html
brlcad/trunk/include/bn.h and 82 others): eliminate some more of
the decorated t i t l e outliers that were inconsistent with the
majority, ones on the main line or single line. |
19:47.19 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59783
brlcad/trunk/src/conv/conv-vg2g.c: omg, don't be so f-ing bossy and
condescending |
19:49.51 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59784
(brlcad/trunk/src/conv/comgeom/f2a.c
brlcad/trunk/src/conv/conv-vg2g.c): ws, style cleanup |
19:51.05 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59785
brlcad/trunk/src/conv/conv-vg2g.c: mat_pr is unused,
remove |
19:52.40 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59786
brlcad/trunk/src/conv/conv-vg2g.c: eliminate globals |
20:31.55 |
*** join/#brlcad Anaphaxeton
(~george@unaffiliated/anaphaxeton) |
20:58.42 |
kanzure |
javampire: i probably prefer written out
operators, as methods/functions like union, difference, intersect,
etc.. |
20:59.05 |
javampire |
yes, that will be provided too |
21:00.05 |
javampire |
look at the unit test I added for
"combination", something similar will be supported |
21:01.14 |
javampire |
but I would also add some overloaded operators
too, in some occasions that could look better |
21:01.28 |
javampire |
at least the '-' for subtraction is looking
much better |
21:02.02 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:brlcad * 59787
(brlcad/trunk/include/bn.h brlcad/trunk/include/nmg.h and 45
others): clean up the remainder of non-conformant comment header
expansions, removed |
21:13.51 |
*** join/#brlcad kesha
(~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
23:47.20 |
Notify |
03BRL-CAD:tbrowder2 * 59788
(brlcad/trunk/include/bu.h brlcad/trunk/src/libbu/CMakeLists.txt
and 3 others): move bit twiddle literals to a new, private header;
rename with BU_ prefix |