Re: [pooma-dev] RFA: Field-Related Pooma Code Changes

[Stephen A. Smith]

Jeffrey Oldham wrote:

> The majority of these changes consist of:
> o Reorder constructor's initializers to reflect class declaration order.
> o Add an initializer for the base class.
> o Add `typename's.

I reviewed the typename changes in src/Evaluator and they look ok.

>
> o Change preprocessor line from `if' to `ifdef'.
>

Changing the preprocessor line is NOT ok.  The convention for most of
the POOMA_ macros (POOMA_THREADS POOMA_PROFILE
etc.) is to define them to be 0 or 1 (POOMA_NO or POOMA_YES).
If there are situations where some of these are not defined, then there's
a problem with the configuration program (or with the prefix file if you're
using CodeWarrior).  Several of the changes you listed,
POOMA_SCHEDULER_SERIAL_ASYNC,
POOMA_BRAIN_DAMAGED_MICROSOFT_LIB,
POOMA_NONSTANDARD_ITERATOR
are defined in some configurations, typically to be 0.
There appear to be a large number of oversights on our part
where they are not defined in some configurations.

Could you hold off on the preprocessor changes.  The set of configuration
macros should probably be completely reviewed at some point.

Thanks,

    Stephen Smith