On 03/24/2014 08:28 AM, Aleksey Mokhovikov wrote:
> On 03/22/2014 04:13 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>> My expectation when I invented that microproject was that converting the
>> code to be table-driven would be judged *not* to be an improvement. I
>> was hoping that a student would say "the 'if' statement is OK, but let's
>> delete this ridiculous unreachable else branch". Possibly they would
>> convert the "if" chain into nested "if"s, which I think would allow some
>> code consolidation in one of the branches.
>> But not a single student agreed with me, so I must be in a minority of
>> one (which, unfortunately, is the definition of lunacy).
>> The multidimensional array lookup table is not so terrible, but I
>> personally still prefer the "if".
> That was expectable. But the main goal for me was to participate in git
> development process, to become familiar with it.
> It looks hard to participate when not proposing a patch.
> I thought about make a small change in if chain, but it looked to minor
> to feel whole development process.
> I've used git features for formatting and sending a patch to mailing list.
> I've met the GNU gettext restrictions when proposed a first patch.
> Proposed another patch and tried to show Pros and Cons.
> It didn't look like applying a patch to git master branch was the main goal.
> As for me that was quite interesting and useful.
Sorry if there was a misunderstanding. I didn't mean to criticize you
and certainly not to single you out among the many students who went for
a table-driven solution. I was rather replying to Junio's general
comment, that maybe changing the code to be table-driven wasn't such a
good idea. These things are always a matter a taste, and sometimes hard
to predict before one has tried writing the code a couple of different ways.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html