On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Eric Kow <[email protected]> wrote: > Petr: Posting the note about how the index works and the relevant code > snippet to avoid a questions avalanche was probably a good idea. I bet > you weren't expecting it to turn into a big debate about a single Maybe! > I do hope this goes in some sort of hashed-storage documentation, either > in the repo or the wiki.
> [snip] > > > Moreover, this is becoming pointless quickly, diverting precious time > > that could be spent improving the code into bikeshedding. > > Eh, it's just part of our charmingly human nature! I do think it's > important to take these tendencies into stride. Thanks for mediating Eric. I'd also like to point out, the "investment factor". I've invested a substantial amount of time and energy in refactoring darcs to be safer and cleaner internally (as have others). So naturally, the thought of bringing in new code which has uglies in it, like 'undefined' means that I'm going to react at least a little. It's simple really, and I believe the concept is known as "cognitive dissonance" (hoping I spelled that correctly). I certainly don't want to bring your work to a halt by dragging my feet. On the other hand, I don't want to see my (and others' including you) investment diminished by something that is relatively easy to avoid. My way of resolving the dissonace is to advocate what I think is a less ugly way of doing things. You don't want to do it. I have trouble seeing the value in using undefined, but I'm not the one writing the code so I guess I should just drop it. Good luck with testing and I genuinely hope this doesn't turn into a maintenance nightmare later for everyone's sake. Jason PS I don't think this particular suggestion counts as a bikeshed so it feels dismissive when you say that; and no one likes to be dismissed.
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
