On 13 Oct 2016, at 10:13, Gregory Szorc <gregory.sz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Martijn Pieters <m...@zopatista.com > <mailto:m...@zopatista.com>> wrote: > > Nice refactor. While I haven't looked at the code in detail yet, does > > check-code not complain about the use of underscore_function_names? > > Apparently not! I did run the whole test suite, and ran it again just now. > Nested function names are locals and exempt from the rule it appears. > > Should I resend with adjusted function names? > > Unless I'm missing something obvious, you should.
Done (bound together with the smaller follow-up patch that I sent as a 2-patch series this time). -- Martijn
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurialemail@example.com https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel