> There is no easy to follow main thread of execution, instead you have one
> method calling the next calling another. That is why things like trying
> re-enter on bad data or even trying to get ahold of the message id after 3
> jumps between differnet methods becomes so difficult.

The lack of an easy to follow thread of execution is simply because I had
the methods in no particular order. I just arranged them in their proper
order and the thread of execution is quite clear. They now always call
down and the methods are discreet, overridable, replacable chunks of code.

> I have nothing against functional coding, but a function should represent
> a mathematical map of input -> output. Just splitting the chunks of code into 
> a
> hundred public methods will only make life hell for people trying to use this.

Any code which could be overriden by a subclass (reasonably) should also 
be its own method.

The reason that there are so many methods is actually because
there are two distinct units in the code which should actually be split
into different classes, the code for sending a insert/request and handling
the thread of messages necessary to properly insert/request something, and
the code which wraps around that, doing things like parsing command line
arguements, encrypting the file, etc.. I was just in the process of
splitting the classes into two, but I'll wait for you to commit.

> It's been two months Brandon...

I'm not sure what you're saying here. That I should have done more in the
last two months to fix up the ugly client code which I mostly didn't
write? Well I did my best while working 12 hours a day, taking summer
classes, administrating the mailing lists, and going to two
conferences. If only there were more hours in the day. But please, come
down with your Godlike coding prowess and fix it.


_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev

Reply via email to