Operator Precedence and Patches.

[ralph at inputplus.co.uk]

Hi Tony,

> > Carl Hetherington's patched our local copy of defmod thus.
> 
> I assume that's !OSLib.tools.Defmod2.support.c.x.

It's an x.c, I couldn't say where since we don't have a support
directory.

> > Given `+' has higher precedence that `<<' that looks right from
> > here.  Thought it worth passing back to OSLib.
> 
> I appreciate that, thank you. Interestingly, this bug(?) was not
> present in the general-purpose version of this module in
> OSLibSupport, and from which this derived. Someone must have thought
> it was better without the brackets.  Would that someone like to
> comment?

Must admit, I remove redundant parenthesis too, disliking the clutter.
But then I only do it if I'm sure of the precedence.

> > Whilst I'm here, we (http://riscose.sf.net/) want to try and keep
> > up to date with OSLib changes.  I see the OSLib download page only
> > gives the last two or three versions.  Given their size this is
> > understandable.  But is it possible that patches could be available
> > too, and left there for longer so we can see the changes made over
> > five or ten versions?  Alternatively, is an OSLib CVS repository
> > available where we can `cvs rdiff' based on tags to generate the
> > patches whenever we want?
> 
> Personally, I have only very recently put OSLib under CVS control, so
> that won't help you historically.

Fortunately, our baseline is your 6.30 so we need nothing earlier than
that.

> Generating the patches for each version seems like even more work.

How about patches from now on?  If you're using CVS and tagging the
releases then I think we're after

    cvs rdiff -r oslib-630 -r oslib-631 -u oslib |
    gzip -9 >oslib-630-631.patch.gz

> If there's sufficient support from users, and depending upon the
> state of Tom's repository, we could possibly put it on SourceForge
> and make it public.  I have not approached Tom on this idea, and I've
> no idea how useful this idea would be in general.

Or your working one perhaps, allowing us to fend for ourselves.
Unfortunately, there's another `oslib' project at SourceForge already
so you'd have to augment the name.

Cheers,


Ralph.