Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Revert "Update Ndef.schelp" #2323

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 7, 2016
Merged

Revert "Update Ndef.schelp" #2323

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 7, 2016

Conversation

nuss
Copy link
Contributor

@nuss nuss commented Sep 6, 2016

Reverts #2273

The amendments to the Ndef helpfile use a number of methods that are not available with the standard classlib. I guess they come from the JITLibExtensions quark. Possibly the changes could go into the quarks' helpfile?

@nhthn nhthn added the comp: help schelp documentation label Sep 6, 2016
@crucialfelix
Copy link
Member

Sorry about that. Not familiar with the API there.

Maybe in this case since it is the NDef help file we could just put a comment there that says it requires the JITLibExtensions quark. Then they could see the code and the advantage it gives and it would give them a reason to install that.

But I'm fine with just reverting this here and @tiagmoraismorgado can submit that block to the quark. Maybe that's simpler.

thanks

@crucialfelix crucialfelix added this to the 3.8 milestone Sep 7, 2016
@nuss
Copy link
Contributor Author

nuss commented Sep 7, 2016

Never mind. I'm loosely following the discussions here but missed that pull request before it was merged. I've left some comments in the source commit source if that's useful for someone: b306394

@crucialfelix
Copy link
Member

so addSpec and addPar are in class lib now ? I'm confused

@nuss
Copy link
Contributor Author

nuss commented Sep 7, 2016

No, they are not part of the standard (default) class lib. Didn't I say that?

@crucialfelix
Copy link
Member

You said "never mind" -- vielleicht du hast "kein thema" gemeint.

I thought you meant that you realized that #2273 is not a problem anymore.

but it is. let's revert

@nuss
Copy link
Contributor Author

nuss commented Sep 7, 2016

Sorry, that was a misunderstanding. I meant something like "Nicht so schlimm, man kann's ja rückgängig machen" (after you had apologized for the merge in the first place)

@crucialfelix crucialfelix merged commit 564f081 into supercollider:master Sep 7, 2016
@crucialfelix
Copy link
Member

Alles klar, wir sind rückgegangen.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
comp: help schelp documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants