[Box Backup-dev] changeset [819]

[Chris Wilson]

Hi Ben,

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Ben Summers wrote:

> I agree.

Me too. One thing though: removing code from Win32 does seem to make it 
less likely that compatibility problems and changes to unused bits of code 
(such as STL problems) will not affect the Win32 port, and also makes it 
clearer that the code is not used.

On the other hand, adding new code makes it more likely that changes on 
other bits of code will cause problems for Win32.

So I would say that #ifndef WIN32 ... #endif seems to be OK, but we should 
be very cautious about #ifdef WIN32.

> Perhaps for future work you could try and use the minimum possible #ifdefs. 
> For example, because you no longer have the housekeeping process, you ifdef 
> out everything related. However, you could have left it all in, and just 
> ifdefs out the code which does the actual connection and talking, and level 
> everything else in place. Might not have made all that difference though.

OK, will do. Would you like me to remove them?

> When we come to reorganise things later, we shall use the experience of 
> the Win32 port to make sure it's all encapsulated nicely.

Suggestions welcome at any time, I want to improve the code and not make 
it worse.

Cheers, Chris.
-- 
_ ___ __     _
  / __/ / ,__(_)_  | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK |
/ (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Perl/SQL/HTML Developer |
\ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU-free your mind-and your software |