Hi
agreed AOL is a classifier. The question is not if it is or not. The
question is
what the range of this classifier should be to handle ALL the areas
of native
code, and what their compatibility range should be.
Regards
Mark
On Apr 14, 2007, at 11:15 AM, Eric Redmond wrote:
On 4/14/07, Mark Donszelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi
On Apr 13, 2007, at 2:00 PM, Christian Goetze wrote:
> On 4/13/07, Mark Donszelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Hi Christian,
>
>> you may have a look at
>> http://java.freehep.org/freehep-nar-plugin
>> it does quite a bit of what you suggest, though it is not perfect.
>
> That is pretty neat - but the devil is in the details :)
agreed. Our organization standardizes on a few combinations of
architectures
and OSs, but even then...
> For example,
> you'd want various variants of the same artifact (debug, optimized,
> profiled, quantified, instrumented in other ways) ... Not sure
"AOL"
> cuts it.
yes. Do you (or others) have any suggestions on how one could attack
this problem?
This is traditionally hat "classifiers" are for. Is AOL a
classifier of NAR
artifacts? If not, then there you go.
Eric
Regards
Mark Donszelmann
> --
> cg
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Eric Redmond
http://codehaus.org/~eredmond
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
