This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author timehorse
Recipients amaury.forgeotdarc, effbot, giampaolo.rodola, gregory.p.smith, mrabarnett, pitrou, terry.reedy, timehorse
Date 2008-09-15.11:21:07
SpamBayes Score 3.9412917e-15
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1221477669.15.0.479257741789.issue3825@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Well, I implemented this months ago, but have been busy with other
things so I haven't updated in a while.  I noticed that the current
version is missing my patches for Atomic Grouping / Possessive
Qualifiers and a number of other patches I added in #2636 , but I do
have working test cases and documentation updates for all the features
I've so far implemented as well as splitting my work into separate
sub-issues to make individual selection easier -- though with a number
of my modifications, I found that there are SO MANY co-dependencies
between, say, an engine modification (item 9) and adding Atomic Grouping
/ Possessive Qualifiers (item 1) and using shared Engine Constants (item
10) that I need a branch for Atomic, a branch for Atomic + Engine Mod 1,
Atomic + Engine Mod 2, Atomic + Shared Constants, Atomic + Engine Mod 1
+ Shared Constants AND Atomic + Engine Mod 2 + Shared Constants, and
those were just THREE item co-dependencies.  My code is all off of the
trunk line for 2.6 and is currently available via my Bazaar repository
under https://code.launchpad.net/~timehorse, where you can access any
source tree via the bazaar version control client.  The main reason I
got stumped in my development which might otherwise have implemented ALL
the issues I intended by now is that very situation I just described
where development of new features is NOT mutually independent.  You can
see by all my branches that the multiplicity of A or B or C is just
nightmarish, but what had to be done to keep issues independent.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to having a look at your suggestions and
think we may take best advantage with combining our work visa vi these
things; after all, there's no point re-inventing the wheel.

Thanks again for your contribution, Matthew!
History
Date User Action Args
2008-09-15 11:21:09timehorsesetrecipients: + timehorse, effbot, terry.reedy, gregory.p.smith, amaury.forgeotdarc, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, mrabarnett
2008-09-15 11:21:09timehorsesetmessageid: <1221477669.15.0.479257741789.issue3825@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2008-09-15 11:21:08timehorselinkissue3825 messages
2008-09-15 11:21:07timehorsecreate