Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!husc6!cmcl2!rna!amms4!hjg
From: hjg@amms4.UUCP (Harry Gross)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Future of Minix
Message-ID: <568@amms4.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jul 89 00:27:58 GMT
References: <19654@louie.udel.EDU> <2885@ast.cs.vu.nl>
Reply-To: hjg@amms4.UUCP (Harry Gross)
Organization: Eagle Clothes, Inc., New York, NY
Lines: 29

In article <2885@ast.cs.vu.nl> ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes:
>In article <19654@louie.udel.EDU> V61%DHDURZ1.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Ronald Lamprecht) writes:
>>The additional code should
>>be included in #ifdef DEBUG -- #endif so that it is possible to generate
>>a fast run-time library and a debugging library version. 

In a followup, I expressed the fact that I liked this, and volunteered to
work on it (pending approval from Andy and/or the rest of everyone)

Andy's comment:

>Argh!  I think #ifdefs make code very hard to read and ugly.  I am not all
>that wild about the idea.

To which I reply:

Agreed.  However, there are other possibilities.  I have given this a bit of
thought over the past day or two.  If a very fast, very limited output routine
were created, and calls to it were dependent on a runtime Debug_State variable,
it could be done without #ifdefs (which I don't like either, unless ABSOLUTELY
necessary), and without too great an addition to the size of the code.

Any further comments Andy?  Or anyone else?

-- 
		Harry Gross				 |  reserved for
							 |  something really
Internet: hjg@amms4.UUCP   (we're working on registering)|  clever - any
UUCP: {jyacc, rna, bklyncis}!amms4!hjg			 |  suggestions?