1 |
On 03/15/2016 01:17 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 12:42:51 -0700 |
3 |
> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> On 03/15/2016 12:38 PM, Zac Medico wrote: |
6 |
>>> On 03/15/2016 12:04 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
7 |
>>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 18:04:56 -0700 |
8 |
>>>> Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
>>>> |
10 |
>>>> |
11 |
>>>>>> The only consumer for that allvalid variable is the metadata |
12 |
>>>>>> UnusedCheck class. |
13 |
>>>>>> |
14 |
>>>>>> So the allvalid variable is True until found False |
15 |
>>>>>> by whichever checks along the way find it to be False. Like a |
16 |
>>>>>> fuse, it's good until it's blown, then it can never be good |
17 |
>>>>>> again. I don't think this particular variable justifies a |
18 |
>>>>>> special class that more fully mimics a fuse. Impossible to |
19 |
>>>>>> reset it like a breaker. |
20 |
>>>>> |
21 |
>>>>> Yeah, let's do it. It's a great opportunity to add clarity to the |
22 |
>>>>> code, and prevent future goofs. |
23 |
>>>>> |
24 |
>>>> |
25 |
>>>> Done, it is now dynamic_data['validity_fuse'] which is a Fuse |
26 |
>>>> instance. |
27 |
>>> |
28 |
>>> Nice, thank you! |
29 |
>>> |
30 |
>>> We can also use Fuse for the 'can_force' boolean, right? |
31 |
>>> |
32 |
>> |
33 |
>> For 'changed' as well. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> can_force, is yes |
36 |
> |
37 |
> changed is a no. It is the VCS module Changes class instance. I see |
38 |
> now that I described it wrong in the docstrings. Maybe I should rename |
39 |
> it for better clarity to changes_inst or vcs_changes... ideas? |
40 |
|
41 |
Maybe 'changes'? |
42 |
|
43 |
Also, now that we are using Fuse, can't we stop returning things from |
44 |
these functions entirely, so that dynamic_data is only updated by |
45 |
side-effects? |
46 |
-- |
47 |
Thanks, |
48 |
Zac |