Joel,
Public comment deserves public response:
Over the 2 months that you worked on your extensions to the Search
code, we had numerous emails / chat sessions about what I would not
accept in the engine, namely: 1) adding 2 megs of source code of someone
elses project just to parse logi
On July 16, 2003 17:39, Chris Little wrote:
> Seriously, the single greatest problem with Sword is probably the
> inordinate ratio of people crying for new features to the number people
> they expect to implement them.
This is easy to say. However, until new developers are able to be integrated
i
Also, I'm leaning towards supporting only PocketPC2002+ since that is the
toolset I have.
I would say PocketPC in general ought to be the target. But if you're
going to get us as far as PocketPC 2002, I don't think it should be that
much of a problem for someone else to get it running on the ori
Hugo van der Kooij wrote:
Ahh. May I propose to change "SWORD Module add-ins" on
http://crosswire.org/sword/develop/swordmodule/index.jsp to "Creating a
SWORD Module"?
It will make it a lot easier to find I guess.
Good idea. Done.
Could you (or someone else) add crumbtails to the site? Now t
Hey geeks,
I have a challenge to pose! :) There is new code in
sword/tests/swbuftest.cpp that performs speed tests.
I bet you can't make it faster! :) (actually, I guess I bet you can or
I wouldn't be posting this email)
SWBuf is our new replacement for the STL std::string class. It's used
- Original Message -
From: "Troy A. Griffitts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] PocketPC Development -- _WIN32_WCE #ifdef(s) and
other questions
> Herb,
> After we finally get 1.5.6 out the door, I'll begin movi
Herb,
After we finally get 1.5.6 out the door, I'll begin moving
read/write/lseek calls as inline method calls to FileMgr. They'll just
call ::read/::write/::lseek in the default impl. This should isolate
all fileio into FileMgr, as far as I can remember.
untgz is optional code. you shouldn
That's what I thought and I agree. Since the #ifdef(s) would primarily be
for system services (file/directory, time, etc.), these things should be
broken out into OS specific abstraction layers (like the FileMgr class you
mention). I'm actually pleasantly surprised at how much of the code
compile
As soon as I have some time (which is very soon, I hope, I'm currently in
project that's running a month over time).
Thank you very much for your intentions.
I'm under the persuasion that an editing tool should be a separate piece of software.
I agree with that. My idea is a stand-alone app, wo
If the wince compiler is still so non-standard as to not support our
ANSI/ISO compliant C++ code, then microsoft, like always, still sucks :)
That's not the problem. WinCE, while based on Win2000's kernel, doesn't have
all the Win32 API that Win9x and 2k have. The API is much smaller;
At 11:30 PM 7/16/2003 -0700, you wrote:
John,
and did a Project|Build All Projects
Doh!!! Out of habit I just did a build, not a Build All projects. 580
seconds later (I like that they give you the time in the title bar!), I
completed the build. Thanks for your help and patience!
-John
> > Why not add a simple edit function in Sword itself, with just some
> simple
> > functions, like font-properties and text-references, something like E-
> Sword
> > has.
>
> Are you offering to work on it? ;)
As soon as I have some time (which is very soon, I hope, I'm currently in
project th
On Thursday 17 July 2003 04:09, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> Herb,
> If the wince compiler is still so non-standard as to not support our
> ANSI/ISO compliant C++ code, then microsoft, like always, still sucks :)
That's not the problem. WinCE, while based on Win2000's kernel, doesn't have
al
Why not add a simple edit function in Sword itself, with just some simple
functions, like font-properties and text-references, something like E-Sword
has.
Are you offering to work on it? ;) We do have a commentary editor in
the windows software, and I believe the linux apps have this feature, as
Herb,
If the wince compiler is still so non-standard as to not support our
ANSI/ISO compliant C++ code, then microsoft, like always, still sucks :)
I'd prefer you NOT clutter the code will a million ifdef's. Can you
give me an example? We already added a bunch of stuff to get it to
compile
> > Don makes a good point that we want to enable people to easily place
> > their content into our software-- and I agree.
>
> My arguments really have nothing to do with who creates the document
> itself, just how well it is encoded electronically. I'm not going to
> spend any time writing
What is the stance on me adding a number of these to the source?
#ifdef _WIN32_WCE ...or... #ifndef _WIN32_WCE
If you guys prefer that we don't litter up the code with a bunch of
definition checks like these then I'll need to break out some of the code
(which I'll have to do for directory/file ser
17 matches
Mail list logo
