I don't think the facts I brought up were clear, independently from
what the MP does ("For the record ...").On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Ian Booth <ian.bo...@canonical.com> wrote: > There was no deleted code the the mp that I saw: > > https://code.launchpad.net/~dave-cheney/goyaml/goyaml/+merge/195162 > > Dave may have been referring on irc to an earlier iteration of his work. > His approach was also discussed at the Juju team meeting, and unless I > mis-remember, there was broad approval of the approach taken. > > On 14/11/13 21:33, Gustavo Niemeyer wrote: >> <davecheney> wallyworld_: i fixed the bug, tests all pass >> <davecheney> by deleting code >> <davecheney> i'm not sure how gustavo will like that :) >> <wallyworld_> davecheney: ah, ok. good luck :-) >> >> For the record, please don't delete apparently unused logic from the >> *c.go files in goyaml, unless you went deep into the subject and >> justified accordingly in the proposal. >> >> There is certainly a non-trivial number of uncovered paths, because >> these files were ported from the C libyaml. For that reason, goyaml >> will definitely have uncovered paths, not only because we may be >> lacking paths, but also because we may be lacking the feature itself >> at the moment (for example, multi-document parsing). We should evolve >> towards having more tests and more of these features covered, instead >> of nuking the logic without proper analysis that it was unnecessary in >> C also. >> >> >> gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net >> > > -- > Juju-dev mailing list > Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev -- gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net -- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
