[Nix-dev] Re: [Nix-commits] SVN commit: nix - 19980 - viric - nix/branches

[Lluís Batlle]

Hello Eelco,

I had the feeling that it becomes hard for us to follow the aterm
development. You mentioned about they not accepting your fixes, we
have newer aterm versions provoking segfaults around, either in i686
and x86_64, ... And so we are meanwhile stuck to an old aterm library.

As the aterm functionality is not that big, and most of its benefits
rely on its efficiency (correct me if I understood wrong), I thought
that we could have a "slower-but-reliable" implementation of that.
Pierron also got cought by the idea of getting rid of aterm, and being
already two, we decided to start on something. At least, making a
branch.

Pierron has been thinking on all this the weekend, and he even thinks
that a new implementation can beat the performance of aterm (I assume,
"easily"). I don't know his ideas concrete, maybe whenever he can
commit something, we can keep on talking on this.

I'm pushing him to get first something api-compatible with aterm, and
then we will see what to do next.

Do you think we go the wrong way?

Thank you,
Lluís.

2010/2/14 Eelco Dolstra <e.dolstra at tudelft.nl>:
> Llus Batlle wrote:
>
>> Author: viric
>> Date: 2010-02-13 16:27:50 +0000 (Sat, 13 Feb 2010)
>> New Revision: 19980
>>
>> You can view the changes in this commit at:
>>    https://svn.nixos.org/viewvc/nix?rev=19980&view=rev
>>
>> Added:
>>    nix/branches/noaterm/
>>
>> Log:
>> Creating a branch to try to get a nix without aterm.
>
> Can you give some background on this?  What is the reason for getting rid of it?
>
> --
> Eelco Dolstra | http://www.st.ewi.tudelft.nl/~dolstra/
>