| 1 |
On Wednesday, October 13, 2010 18:13:18 Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: |
| 2 |
> Excerpts from Mike Frysinger's message of Wed Oct 13 23:46:43 +0200 2010: |
| 3 |
> > On Wednesday, October 13, 2010 15:57:17 Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > And why putting different tasks into one function? |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > for the same reason we dont have separate test binaries: test_exist, |
| 7 |
> > test_file, test_dir, etc... |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > it makes more sense in my mind to combine the functionality. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> So the only argument for having more complicated, less intuitive and |
| 12 |
> less readable function is the old 'test' program? Please, reconsider my |
| 13 |
> solution with more reason. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
we prioritize differently. i prefer unified code with options. you preferred |
| 16 |
unrolled duplicated code. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Moreover we're using 'test' as '[[ … ]]' which changes much in readability. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
what are you talking about ? no one is using `test` in their code and if they |
| 21 |
are, their code is broken. none of the stuff ive posted is running `test`. |
| 22 |
-mike |
Archives