On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> The two features are highly intermix, so it can only be dependent patches,
> first to add a function infrastructure and probably some support for doubles
> altough it would not be used, then to add doubles & their functions.
>
> A real pain is the documentation, because it means writing a documentation
> with only integer functions, then overwriting it with doubles. This is dumb
> work, really, for the sake of "a cleaner git history", the beauty of it no
> one will ever contemplate...
FWIW, I care a lot about splitting as much as possible patches where
it is possible to have a clean history. So I would be fine to do a
portion of the legwork and extract from this patch something smaller
that adds only functions as a first step, with the minimum set of
functions I mentioned upthread. Robert, Alvaro, Fabien, does that
sound fine to you?
--
Michael
