[Scilab-Dev] Bug 2789 (debugger broken)

[fvogelnew1 at free.fr]

Vincent,

Enrico is fully right in his answer, but maybe a few more words from me.


> To be short and clear about the current development of Scilab and your
> ceaseless criticisms about the work of operational team.

I'm not criticizing anything. Read my post again. I'm asking what is your plan.


> These reentrant Tcl
> calls can be "quite easily" rewritten by separating calls to ScilabEval
> and calls to TCL_*

Well, I had a try already after I saw your Tcl_thread wiki page.
It's not easy to do in Scipad. Really not.
Have a look at proc checkendofdebug_bp (in SCI/modules/scipad/tcl/db_states.tcl)
for an example.


> But please stop naming a person of the operational team in your mails!
> When a development is done, it is done after dialogue with the whole
> operational team or at least a part of it. So you can invoke the whole
> team responsibility but please stop front attacks!

Again, I did not attack anyone. Nobody, and the operational team as a whole
neither. If anyone is attacking somebody, then you are with your answer. You're
reacting on something that did not happen, please cool down.

What has been written by Bruno about the fact he doesn't want to break things is
public, see last section of
http://lists.scilab.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm-browse?list=dev&cmd=showmsg&msgnum=30
This is what I was referring to.

Since I saw nothing happening recently in the field of the Tcl interface, I'm
wondering whether the work will go on or not on your side, if you consider it's
finished or not. Nothing more, nothing else.


>  * About the bugs in Bugzilla: we cleaned the database during the last
> past weeks and we now have a good idea of all the remaining bugs

That was indeed needed (and this is not a criticism, don't jump on me).

> and we
> try to attach the same importance to each bug and not only the ones you
> want us (operational team) to fix.

You misunderstood my message. I'm not asking for a favor, I'm asking whether you
plan to fix that bug before 5.0 final or not. Or if you want me to do something
in Scipad to work around the new limitation related to reentrant calls. Unless I
misread your anger, you didn't answer that question I think.


> Do not hesitate to send us your encouragement instead of your
> criticisms, we are working hard here however we are still late...

Once more, I made no comment on the fact you're late or not. I'm not waiting for
Scilab 5, and it doesn't matter to me if it comes later than announced.

The fact is that 5.0 final is announced on your website to be released in April,
which is approximately now, and that I'm worried because I don't have a clue
about if bug 2789 will be fixed or not in that version. If it's not, the
debugger will not be working in Scilab 5.

Francois