-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 311
IrcLog2008 06 02
William Deegan edited this page Jan 14, 2016
·
2 revisions
16:23:54 * bdbaddog (n=[bdeegan@adsl-71-131-1-136.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net](mailto:bdeegan@adsl-71-131-1-136.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net)) has joined #scons
16:59:39 * jrandall (n=[jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca](mailto:jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca)) has joined #scons
17:00:32 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Steven and Gary have said they will be late; who else is here for the bug party?
17:00:52 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> And Gary may not make it at all.
17:01:18 <jrandall> here, but after looking through the current list of bugs, there's not a lot I have to add to them
17:01:40 <jrandall> Had a hard time getting into 2007Q3. Any known problem with that spreadsheet?
17:02:08 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> No, just the usual. Nobody has figured out the exact magic needed.
17:03:00 <jrandall> Hrm, I had it opened view-only in another tab, maybe that vexed it for some reason. I'll try again later to see if it likes me then
17:03:24 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Apparently, that's one no-no.
17:03:55 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Could you add that note to the [ReadWrite](ReadWrite) page?
17:04:00 <jrandall> Sure thing
17:04:44 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Bill, are you there? Or was that an automatic connection?
17:06:40 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Apparently not. Only two isn't a quorum, but we can wait a bit and see if Steven or Gary show up.
17:06:48 <jrandall> Sure thing
17:06:48 * chit-chat while wating for quorum
17:12:54 * stevenknight (n=[stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net](mailto:stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)) has joined #scons
17:13:12 <stevenknight> hi, who's here?
17:13:23 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> nobody
17:13:31 <stevenknight> damn
17:13:39 <jrandall> aye, 'tis quiet
17:14:11 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Gary is caught at work and may not make it.
17:16:43 <bdbaddog> Hi All. I'm here til about 5:30ish.
17:17:00 <stevenknight> hi bill
17:17:09 <bdbaddog> Good Day!
17:17:31 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Hey, Bill.
17:17:13 <stevenknight> i just got connected myself, shall we dive into the current issues?
17:17:39 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Sure
17:17:38 <stevenknight> 2073: moot, already fixed
17:17:56 <stevenknight> 2074: consensus 2.x p2
17:18:14 <stevenknight> 2076: consensus 1.x p1
17:18:43 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Geeze, let me catch up.
17:19:20 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 2074, 2076, done
17:19:30 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 2077
17:19:37 <stevenknight> oh, 2076: we should assign to someone, yes?
17:19:54 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Assign Bill
17:20:01 <stevenknight> works for me
17:20:10 <bdbaddog> oh boy. imagine if I wasn't here.. ;)
17:20:17 <stevenknight> 2077: consensus 1.x
17:20:28 <stevenknight> two votes (kind of) for p4, any objections?
17:20:43 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Er, 2077 assign Bill; I'll look at 2076
17:20:56 <stevenknight> okay
17:20:57 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> unless Bill wants it
17:21:35 <bdbaddog> nope. but I'll take a look at 2077. might be 2 weeks as I have trade show next week, before I get a chance.
17:21:45 <stevenknight> done
17:21:47 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
17:22:03 <stevenknight> 2078: 1.x, p2, me (along with other Visual Studio / VC work)
17:22:21 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> ok
17:22:39 <stevenknight> (the reprioritization after 1.0 is released is going to be fun...)
17:22:49 <stevenknight> 2079: 2.x, greg?
17:23:05 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Hmmm... OK, I guess
17:23:14 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> what priority?
17:23:28 <stevenknight> sounds like you have a handle on it
17:23:37 <stevenknight> I don't quite grok why a File.Grep() method
17:23:54 <bdbaddog> it's like Glob() but with regular expressions..
17:24:00 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> It's not obvious when to use f.name and str(f)
17:24:09 <stevenknight> as opposed to some more generic method that might also grep for Dir, Alias, Value...
17:24:27 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> No, no, no, it looks at file contents.
17:24:39 <stevenknight> ah
17:24:41 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Like a scanner.
17:24:50 <bdbaddog> oh. I thought from the emails, the requestor wanted to grep the file names,not contents.
17:25:10 <stevenknight> yeah, like Filter (and [FilterOut](FilterOut)) in Ant
17:25:25 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> No, he wanted to scan for 'int main(' to locate the main programs
17:25:28 <bdbaddog> o.k. never mind just reread.
17:25:44 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Maybe those are better names (FilterIn/Out)
17:25:55 <stevenknight> well, they imply matching names, not file contents
17:26:02 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Ah, true.
17:26:05 <bdbaddog> yes. sounds clearer, Grep makes me think Glob but Regex.
17:26:13 <stevenknight> i guess rather than add a special method (IMHO)
17:26:40 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> (yes?)
17:26:47 <stevenknight> i'm more interested in giving File nodes a read() method
17:26:57 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Hmmmm......
17:26:58 <stevenknight> that looks like normal Python file objects
17:26:59 <bdbaddog> ahh. I like that even more.
17:27:12 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I think I do, too
17:27:14 <stevenknight> and then let people manipulate f1.read() using normal Python
17:27:41 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Yes, good idea. I'll write it up that way.
17:27:49 <stevenknight> okay, thanks
17:27:57 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> next?
17:28:16 <stevenknight> 2080: TASK
17:28:32 <stevenknight> i forget, how are we marking items like this? 1.0 and just move them along?
17:28:39 <stevenknight> i.e., things that can be done any time
17:28:42 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> How about David as a release team member?
17:28:50 <stevenknight> ++
17:28:58 <bdbaddog> I think he said he didn't have enough time though.
17:29:03 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> No, I make up something
17:29:48 <stevenknight> ??
17:29:48 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I don't think being on the mailing list would be a problem; I'd appreciate his insight for the spreadsheets.
17:30:07 <stevenknight> agreed
17:30:12 <bdbaddog> sounds good.
17:30:40 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> "make up something" === try to guess when it would be done; it's what the not-research items should be.
17:30:54 <stevenknight> okay
17:31:17 <stevenknight> 2081: consensus 1.x p2
17:31:29 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I can create something for backburner issues, but "backburner" is not a name that delights me.
17:31:51 <stevenknight> "backburner" to me would be implied by the priority
17:32:02 <stevenknight> since the target milestone is really about timeframe
17:32:07 <stevenknight> how about an explicit "anytime"
17:32:09 <stevenknight> ?
17:32:20 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Hmmm.... I'll look at that
17:32:24 <stevenknight> okay
17:32:34 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 2081: done
17:33:12 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 2082: split between p2 and p4
17:33:15 <stevenknight> 2082: i meant 1.x
17:33:18 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> (both 1.x)
17:33:41 <stevenknight> so 1.x, and p3? (split the difference)
17:33:47 <bdbaddog> Looks like just needs some tests to be able to be applied right?
17:33:56 <bdbaddog> Do we have much coverage on rc files?
17:34:18 <stevenknight> not a lot
17:34:23 <stevenknight> i was just dealing with rc file today
17:34:34 <stevenknight> so i'd put my name on this one, too
17:34:39 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> works
17:35:03 <bdbaddog> O.k I"m a pumpkin. I've gotta head to class.
17:35:04 <stevenknight> 2083: looks like consensus 1.x p2
17:35:08 <bdbaddog> Good evening to all.
17:35:10 <stevenknight> later
17:35:13 * bdbaddog has quit ("Leaving.")
17:36:05 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 2083: yeah, but we need to talk about the model.
17:36:16 <stevenknight> fire away
17:36:28 <stevenknight> or did you mean on the ML?
17:36:25 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Maybe not right now, but there needs to be some agreement on how to do it.
17:36:45 <stevenknight> okay
17:37:09 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> ML would be fine; the last time I wrote a suggestion about it, it just died away, and I still don't have any real ideas
17:37:34 <stevenknight> yeah, i may be the only one who cares about it in practice
17:37:44 <stevenknight> purely because of wanting to do everything that Make does... :-)
17:37:46 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> No, I do
17:37:58 <stevenknight> no, i mean cares whether there is a mechanism that works
17:38:06 <stevenknight> i think most people want it to just go away... :-)
17:38:05 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> The real problem is less-than-clean removals
17:38:17 <stevenknight> ah, right
17:39:08 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> If it were only creating "cleaner" levels, it would be easy, but you want to be able to clean out, say, just the intermediate files
17:39:17 <stevenknight> right
17:39:40 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I just don't have any good idea for how to do thatt.
17:39:45 <stevenknight> so for now: 1.x, p2, and either you or I to lead discussion (even if it's just between the two of us)?
17:39:52 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> works
17:40:03 <stevenknight> either that or "research" since we're still not sure
17:40:23 <stevenknight> your choice, 1.x or research
17:40:48 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1.x; that'll force us to look at it at a specific time
17:40:52 <stevenknight> good
17:41:02 <stevenknight> 2084: i'm clueless
17:41:07 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 2084, where's Gary?
17:41:17 <stevenknight> we could make it research, garyo
17:41:29 <stevenknight> just so he doesn't escape completely unscathed by not showing up... :-)
17:41:35 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I'll buy that!
17:41:43 <stevenknight> done
17:41:49 <jrandall> lol
17:42:20 <stevenknight> 2085: 1.0, p4 (split difference), me
17:42:28 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
17:42:53 <stevenknight> i have doc changes teed up for once i get 0.98.5 out (I hope later this evening, this past weekend was overrun by daughter's birthday)
17:43:12 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Happy birthday; daughters are dangerous
17:43:30 <stevenknight> oh my goodness yes
17:43:34 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> how old?
17:43:39 <stevenknight> 10
17:43:44 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> ouch!
17:44:05 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I remember my niece at ten.... oh, my, are you in for it!
17:44:25 <stevenknight> yeah, I'm right on the cusp of going from being cool Dad to the biggest dork in the world
17:44:46 <stevenknight> mind you, that last bit isn't much of a stretch...
17:45:20 <stevenknight> anyway, 2007 q2?
17:45:32 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> er, q3?
17:45:41 <stevenknight> oh, right, q3
17:45:48 <stevenknight> i was working ahead a little on q2
17:46:20 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1869
17:46:51 <stevenknight> ?
17:46:55 <stevenknight> i have 1687 as the first?
17:47:01 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> fixed
17:47:08 <stevenknight> ah
17:47:39 <stevenknight> 1689: consensus 1.x,
17:47:55 <stevenknight> p2?
17:48:14 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Another one that needs some discussion after a bit of research, but
17:48:27 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> p2 is a reasonable time to do it.
17:48:27 <stevenknight> right
17:48:43 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> OK, done
17:49:08 <stevenknight> assign to...? you (maybe [ParseConfig](ParseConfig)), me (I might know what's going on), leave blank for now?
17:49:41 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> blank, actually issues@scons
17:49:55 <stevenknight> okay
17:50:09 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I don't think it was backtick
17:50:27 <stevenknight> maybe not
17:50:04 <stevenknight> 1690: research, me (Visual Studio stuff)
17:50:40 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1690, done
17:50:52 <stevenknight> 1691: documentation, 1.0, me
17:51:14 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
17:51:28 <stevenknight> 1692: research, me (Visual Studio again)
17:51:29 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> may need to follow up to see what the message was
17:51:40 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1692, done
17:51:52 <stevenknight> 1693: consensus 1.x p2
17:52:08 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
17:52:09 <stevenknight> good manageable bug for someone else to take
17:52:15 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> yes
17:52:28 <stevenknight> 1697: research, me (Visual Studio)
17:52:47 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> okay
17:53:16 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1701, ditto
17:53:17 <stevenknight> 1701: research, me (Visual Studio)
17:53:19 <stevenknight> right
17:53:20 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
17:53:34 <stevenknight> it isn't the pipes thing, it has to do with how we look in the #*@&(#$ registry for various info
17:53:56 <stevenknight> 1702: same...
17:54:02 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1702, ditto
17:54:10 <stevenknight> man, there's a lot of Visual Studio cruft piling up
17:54:26 <stevenknight> I'm really itching to get in there and clean this stuff up
17:54:50 <stevenknight> 1703:
17:54:52 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Do you want a keyword for it? I can set it up, but you'll have to assign them all.
17:54:56 <stevenknight> not sure about my 1.x p3
17:55:04 <stevenknight> keyword: yes
17:55:17 <stevenknight> "[VisualStudio](VisualStudio)" seems logical
17:55:30 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> do you mean 1704?
17:55:39 <stevenknight> oh, yes 1704:
17:56:00 <stevenknight> 1704: seems like if it were really crucial more people would have asked for it
17:56:07 <stevenknight> i only know of this one patch
17:56:19 <stevenknight> on the other hand, it kind of goes along with what Russel was saying on the ML today
17:56:33 <stevenknight> about how SCons really doesn't have much traction in the Java community
17:56:35 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> There was something on the mailing list about JAR() recently, maybe today?
17:56:46 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> oops, you already said that
17:56:47 <stevenknight> yeah, Russel's threads
17:57:00 <stevenknight> let's leave it p3
17:57:06 <stevenknight> since there's already a patch
17:57:07 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> OK
17:57:25 <stevenknight> if we ever are going to do better with Java, it can't hurt to have this already supported
17:57:32 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Maybe draft a Java specialist to keep us on track
17:57:50 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Maybe Russel?
17:57:58 <stevenknight> maybe
17:58:09 <stevenknight> he tends to appear and reapper in fits and starts
17:58:14 <stevenknight> disappear i mean
17:58:47 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I'll write him about creating a wiki page with what's needed for Java support
17:58:56 <stevenknight> hmm, i thought i recalled there was someone else who showed up on the ML with some Java knowledge a month or two ago
17:59:09 <stevenknight> maybe i'm making that up
17:59:22 <stevenknight> well, it can't hurt to ask, anyway
17:59:24 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> No, I have his name
17:59:37 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I'll ask them both
17:59:43 <stevenknight> good idea re: wiki page
17:59:49 <stevenknight> sounds good
18:00:35 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> anyway, what did we decide about 1704?
18:01:04 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1.x, p2, you?
18:01:21 <stevenknight> done
18:01:58 <stevenknight> 1705: 1.x, jim ... p3?
18:02:05 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> or p2
18:02:09 <jrandall> Aye - I've got a patch in that fixes it
18:02:24 <stevenknight> jrandall++
18:02:32 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> bravo!
18:02:47 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> p2 then?
18:02:48 <jrandall> thanks.
18:02:52 <stevenknight> yeah, p2
18:02:55 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
18:03:23 <stevenknight> 1706: 1.x, but now i'm not sure of priority
18:03:50 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I'll look at it, maybe p4?
18:04:02 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> It's part of getting symlinks right.
18:04:16 <stevenknight> sure, 1.x, p4, you
18:04:21 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
18:04:44 <stevenknight> 1707: consensus 2.x p4
18:04:53 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done, or future?
18:05:26 <stevenknight> hmm, i'm torn
18:05:38 <stevenknight> part of me says future because no one seems to have asked for it
18:05:47 <stevenknight> but maybe 2.x because there's already code
18:06:06 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Yeah, but infected
18:07:12 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Let's leave it at 2.x p4 and revisit later
18:07:24 <stevenknight> okay
18:07:31 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1708, I'll go with Ken to look at it.
18:08:00 <stevenknight> 1708: okay
18:08:15 <stevenknight> I may need to take it back if he doesn't pop up again
18:08:26 <stevenknight> but we should at least see if he can take it
18:08:27 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> If he doesn't like it, he can kick it elsewhere.
18:08:32 <stevenknight> yeah
18:08:38 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I'll put that in the note.
18:08:43 <stevenknight> okay
18:09:14 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1711, quite a mix
18:09:18 <stevenknight> 1711: yeah
18:09:30 <stevenknight> when in doubt, shade to the earlier target
18:09:37 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Huh?
18:09:46 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Oh, I see.
18:09:55 <stevenknight> i tend to go with the earlier/earliest milestone
18:10:26 <stevenknight> i'd rather make sure it gets considered and reprioritize to later if necessary
18:10:27 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Let's make it 1.x then and give it to Gary, since he's not here
18:10:48 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> p3?
18:10:53 <stevenknight> ah, good idea -- he's done subst stuff
18:10:54 <stevenknight> yes, p3
18:10:58 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
18:11:17 <stevenknight> 1712: 2.x, p3
18:11:27 <stevenknight> perhaps Benoit if we want to assign it
18:11:32 <stevenknight> he's good at things like this
18:12:00 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I'd want measurements. I don't think scanners are that slow.
18:12:19 <stevenknight> good point, they're probably not
18:12:26 <jrandall> Aye. Not clear where the tradeoff would be as to whether it'd be worth it or not
18:12:37 <jrandall> Most of mine, it wouldn't be worth spawning
18:12:46 <stevenknight> actually, (off topic) i have an optimization i'm thinking of that I'd like to discuss with you some time
18:13:02 <stevenknight> let's get through bugs first though
18:13:19 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> In fact, I think a small rewrite so that scanners overlap with the previous command would cure it.
18:13:36 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> I do that in TaskmasterNG
18:13:42 <jrandall> nice
18:13:43 <stevenknight> oh, very cool
18:13:48 <stevenknight> simple and effective
18:14:14 <stevenknight> 1714: 1.x, p3
18:14:15 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Is that the optimization?
18:14:59 <stevenknight> no, it's basically trying to make searching CPPPATH O(1) instead of O(n)
18:15:06 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1714, agreed, but spin off JAR to another issue
18:15:16 <stevenknight> 1714: agreed
18:15:26 <stevenknight> 1.x, p3, garyo
18:15:38 <stevenknight> could also go to Russel or whoever gets to be Java guru
18:15:53 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done; I'll note that
18:16:13 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> OT: yes, they should be hashed better.
18:16:16 <stevenknight> good
18:16:43 <stevenknight> OT: actually, even beyond that, the search is attached to the wrong object
18:16:51 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1717, you, VS
18:17:07 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> OT: yes, I've noticed that
18:17:08 <stevenknight> 1717: yes
18:17:15 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
18:17:41 <stevenknight> 1722: it's Bill's, let's WONTFIX it... :-)
18:17:52 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1720, has Bill left?
18:18:05 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> oops, 1722
18:18:10 <stevenknight> yeah he's gone
18:18:19 <stevenknight> so he gets what he deserves... :-)
18:18:27 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> OK, WONTFIX unless he provides a test case
18:18:37 <stevenknight> done
18:19:00 <stevenknight> 1723: can this be part of the toolchain stuff you and Gary have on the backburner?
18:19:10 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> yes
18:19:15 <stevenknight> oh, yeah, your comment even *says* that...
18:19:21 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> yup
18:19:32 <stevenknight> future, you?
18:19:36 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done
18:19:51 <stevenknight> 1730: 1.x, p3, Rob?
18:20:33 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Uh, maybe not Rob
18:21:11 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Oops, I was thinking of another issue; yes, Rob.
18:21:19 <stevenknight> okay
18:21:27 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> It's a little out of his area, but he can work with you.
18:21:56 <stevenknight> okay
18:22:21 <stevenknight> 1735: research, Rob?
18:22:30 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> 1735, what if it's still a bug? Where to put it?
18:22:56 <stevenknight> I'm agnostic -- 1.x p3?
18:23:22 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> works; I'll tell him to contact me if he needs to
18:23:27 <stevenknight> done
18:23:39 <stevenknight> 1716: research, me, [VisualStudio](VisualStudio)
18:23:57 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done; quit for the evening?
18:24:02 <stevenknight> yeah, i have to run
18:24:06 <stevenknight> real quick re: CPPPATH
18:24:06 * off-topic discussion between stevenknight and [GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)
18:30:36 <stevenknight> okay, really gotta run
18:30:39 <stevenknight> thanks!
18:30:39 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> When shall we all meet again?
18:30:39 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> In thunder, lightning, or in rain?
18:30:39 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> Where the place, ... same time next week?
18:30:52 <stevenknight> oh, damn, that's right
18:30:57 <stevenknight> yes, default, same time and place
18:31:01 <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)> done; cu
18:31:05 <stevenknight> l8r
18:31:06 * stevenknight has quit ("Leaving")
18:31:07 <jrandall> see you
18:31:09 * jrandall (n=[jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca](mailto:jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca)) has left #scons