February 12, 2012 Re: Programming for std.log | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to David Nadlinger | On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 8:32 PM, David Nadlinger <see@klickverbot.at> wrote: > On 2/12/12 11:22 PM, Jose Armando Garcia wrote: >> >> Sorry for the false alarm. I think the problem went away once I rebuild dmd, druntime and phobos. Your advice was really good in helping me make any sense of this! Thanks. >> >> -Jose > > > So std.log is still/again ready for review? Yep! It should be. I am fixing some minor things now. Will do some final testing in Windows. Don't foresee any problems there. I will send you an email in a bit. Either way I think it should be ready for review by tomorrow! > > std.log has been in the queue forever (but was previously postponed due to Jose being unavailable), std.uuid is small (but parts of it depend on not-yet-in-Phobos hashing code), and Jacob Carlborg is waiting for feedback on Orange – no clear winner, but to finally get the process running again, I'd suggest to begin the std.log review tomorrow. Since nobody else stepped up, I'd volunteer as review manager. > > David |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation