Re: gEDA-user: pcb still unable to run actions with print HID

[Jared Casper <jaredcasper@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 5:32 PM, kai-martin knaak <kmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I understand, that you are weary to remove the CRASH statement when not 100%
> sure what it's purpose in this particular case is. But is this a valid
> reason to withhold a working patch and keep printing from the command line
> in a crippled state? I made it pretty clear, that I am interested in getting

While you know I'm all for community contributed patches getting in, I
disagree that this should be applied as is without understanding what
is going on.  imho, bandaids covering up bugs should be avoided at all
cost, especially if you don't even know if it is a bandaid or not.  A
bug left in the code (especially one with a work-around) is better
than one covered with a bandaid.

If you want to help fix the bug, figure out why invalidate_lr is being
called without a gui and make an argument as to why that is okay, or
make it so it doesn't happen.

Seems like the purpose of those CRASH statements are to let the hid
developer know that a hid function is being called that he hasn't
explicitly implemented.   That seems like a worthwhile thing to have
and not just ditch because you don't understand why that function is
being called.  If there is a legitimate reason why it is okay for that
function to be called when using the printing hid, maybe the better
solution is to point to a blank function in the print hid's structure
instead of leaving it null to default to hidnogui's function?  This
would explicitly document that "this is going to be called for this
gui and its okay", rather then taking out the general mechanism to
know when something is called that you didn't anticipate.  (although
maybe that isn't the best solution, haven't thought it through
fully...)

> command line printing fixed. Why didn't I get a note that only half the
> patch was applied? Yes, I can fix it on my local copy. But this does not
> help with colleagues and students who I teach using geda.
>

I do agree whoever applied it should've let you know that part of it
wasn't going in, if that is the case.

Jared


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user