Re: [PATCH 01/11] widl: New option --rt for enabling rt's specific language extensions.

[André Hentschel]

Am 08.08.2013 17:51, schrieb Kai Tietz:
> Hi,
>
> this patch adds new --rt option to widl.  By it you can control, if
> RT's IDL-language-extension(?s) getting active.
> This initial patch just adds the option-scanning and the global
> flag-variable to widl.
>
> Ok for apply?

I'd say no, you are adding dead code, so you might want to merge it with 2/11 to avoid that.

[PATCH 01/11] widl: New option --rt for enabling rt's specific language extensions.

[Kai Tietz]

2013/8/8 André Hentschel <nerv(a)dawncrow.de>:
> Am 08.08.2013 17:51, schrieb Kai Tietz:
> > Hi,
> >
> > this patch adds new --rt option to widl.  By it you can control, if
> > RT's IDL-language-extension(?s) getting active.
> > This initial patch just adds the option-scanning and the global
> > flag-variable to widl.
> >
> > Ok for apply?
>
> I'd say no, you are adding dead code, so you might want to merge it with 2/11 to avoid that.

Well, it isn't dead-code.  Patch contains one complete thing.  It
introduces an new switch.  I separate this switch out, as it can be
reviewed absolutely independently to the actual namespace lexer/parser
thing (which is the first user of this switch).
Jacek asked me to break things down in small logical pieces, so I did.

Kai

[PATCH 01/11] widl: New option --rt for enabling rt's specific language extensions.

[Jacek Caban]

On 08/08/13 19:56, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2013/8/8 André Hentschel <nerv(a)dawncrow.de>:
> > Am 08.08.2013 17:51, schrieb Kai Tietz:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > this patch adds new --rt option to widl.  By it you can control, if
> > > RT's IDL-language-extension(?s) getting active.
> > > This initial patch just adds the option-scanning and the global
> > > flag-variable to widl.
> > >
> > > Ok for apply?
> > > I'd say no, you are adding dead code, so you might want to merge it with 2/11 to avoid that.
> > > Well, it isn't dead-code.  Patch contains one complete thing.  It
> > > introduces an new switch.  I separate this switch out, as it can be
> > > reviewed absolutely independently to the actual namespace lexer/parser
> > > thing (which is the first user of this switch).
> > > Jacek asked me to break things down in small logical pieces, so I did.

Yeah, deciding on how much to split patches is sometimes tricky. This
patch does not introduce dead code (but rather dead command like
argument), so I think it's fine. This needs man page update, but that
may be done as a follow up.

Jacek