Re: Test framework; new counter class

[David Sugar]

r1 is the 1.0.x tree.  Yes, I tend to agree, to keep uber out of that, and 
make it the default counter class in -HEAD (for 1.1).

On Thursday 02 January 2003 09:09, Albert Strasheim wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 02 Jan 2003, David Sugar wrote:
> > I am a little hesitent in the idea of putting something new or different
> > into the r1 branch, especially since I think this new ubercounter should
> > actually
>
> I'm a bit new to the Common C++ scene -- is the r1 branch going to be
> shipping as a 1.0.x release or a 1.1.0 release? If it's a 1.0.x, leave
> UberCounter out of the branch.
>
> > depreciate the existing counter stuff.  I do not know if anyone uses
> > existing counters but unless it were a true drop in replacement, there is
> > concern will break behavior or interfaces existing apps depend on, and I
> > do not want people to start coding for "ubercounter" if later we make
> > "ubercounter" simply "counter".
>
> The reason I didn't design it to be a drop-in replacement is because the
> existing couters were perhaps a bit mmm... random in what they could and
> couldn't do.
>
> I agree that we don't want to rename UberCounter at a later stage.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Albert
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp