2012/4/5 Maurizio Lombardi <[email protected]>

> 2012/4/5 Tobias Börtitz <[email protected]>:
> > So here comes the patch again.
> >
>
> Mmmm, the patch looks good but what I don't like is the end result,
> I mean, now we have the following functions:
>
> do_copy()
> do_copy_file()
> do_copy_dir()
> copy_file()
>
> Looks like a crazy thing, in fact, it is harder to read than before.
> This is my opinion... I know I'm the one to blame for this mess.



> What I suggest to do:
>
> keep the old do_copy() function and apply the "interactive" patch to it;
>
Yes I must admit that the splitting of the do_copy() function has made the
code even harder to read and understand.
So I rewound the split of this function and prepared another patch only
including the original purpose (introducing the -i flag).


> Than later I could (or you Tobias, if you want) rewrite the do_copy()
> function
> in a non-crazy form.


> I even noticed one nit, do_copy() returns an int64_t, no need to do that
> it can be replaced with a simple "int".
>
Well I can give it a shot rewriting the do_copy() function next week. While
having some more patches in the pipeline, I wouldn't be mad at you if would
do that either ;-)

Nevertheless thanks for all the feedback on this issue so far.

Cheers
Tobias


>
> --
> --------------------
> Maurizio Lombardi
>
> _______________________________________________
> HelenOS-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.modry.cz/cgi-bin/listinfo/helenos-devel
>

Attachment: cp.patch
Description: Binary data

_______________________________________________
HelenOS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.modry.cz/cgi-bin/listinfo/helenos-devel

Reply via email to