kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Dick Hollenbeck <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 08/13/2013 10:58 AM, Tomasz Wlostowski wrote:
> On 08/13/2013 05:48 PM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 07:14:05AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
>>> If you ignore the context of application, then this is the same thing as guessing that a
>>> mechanic hates his 5mm wrench when he goes to loosen a 11mm nut.
>>
>> I think it more than using a ratchet instead of an open wrench to loose
>> the nut. Same result, different way to do it.
>>
>> Of course a really tight nut may require a long wrench and break the
>> ratchet... i.e. not necessarily coroutines are the solution.
> 
> The solution I proposed does not make coroutines obligatory. If you 
> don't want to use them in a particular tool, just don't call any 
> Wait()/Yield() methods. TOOL_INTERACTIVE constructor could have an 
> additional parameter that prevents creating an unnecessary stack frame 
> for coroutine-less tools.
> 
>>
>> As a way to maintain the tool state machine (fed by events), they seem
>> appropriate to me; of course everyone will propose his own 'best' idea
>> (heck, no women here:P)
>>
> Look at the PDF I put on ohwr.org - one can use coroutines, function 
> pointers or enum+switch for the FSMs, depending on his/her coding 
> habits. Nothing is forbidden.
> 
> Tom



I had not seen the PDF before I made my initial positive comments.  I had only read the
synopsis on the web page.  Maybe I missed it or maybe you added it recently.


I wonder how important building a team around this code is.   I wonder who will be on that
team.

Alfons sunk 7 man years into the code before it was useable.  That suggests a team may be
necessary.

When do we see the code?

Dick