Op Wed, 15 Jun 2005 21:33:16 +0100 schreef James Youngman in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: : On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 10:10:55PM +0200, Bas van Gompel wrote: : > Hi, : > : > Following patch moves limit-checking and counting into visitors. : > When neither is done, a visitor is added which will increment : > items_accepted once, then remove itself from the list. : : I like visit_count() and visit_limit() but I'm not sure about : visit_found(). The latter is interesting but complicates the code - : what are the benefits that make it worthwhile to make the code more : complex? I admit that the difference is small.
If you don't have visit_found, you can't determine whether anything was found, and therefore it will be impossible to set the returnvalue of the program sensibly. Having to do visit_count every time would be slower. : I'd prefer to adopt visit_count() and visit_limit() but not : visit_found(). However, if you can think of a strong agrument in : favour of visit_found() I could be convinced. Does the above convince you? L8r, Buzz. -- ) | | ---/ ---/ Yes, this | This message consists of true | I do not -- | | / / really is | and false bits entirely. | mail for ) | | / / a 72 by 4 +-------------------------------+ any1 but -- \--| /--- /--- .sigfile. | |perl -pe "s.u(z)\1.as." | me. 4^re _______________________________________________ Bug-findutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-findutils
