On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 5:18 PM David Bremner <da...@tethera.net> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes:
> > We don't need a Tags enumerable object only for a small number of strings, 
> > we
> > can just get them directly.
> >
> > This fixes an interaction problem where we might request two tags iterables
> > from the same message:
> >
> >   tags_0 = notmuch_message_get_tags(message);
> I have applied this series to master.
> By the way I noticed that the formatting of the old bindings code does
> not match the output of uncrustify -c ./devel/uncrustify/cfg $file.
> This is not a serious problem, but it does make the review process a bit
> noisy (since my clumsy script reformats every file touched by a given
> commit). Do you have any objection to my just going through and
> reformatting the bindings code with uncrustify at some point? It can be
> done as patches also, but it's a bit silly because there can be many
> small diffs.

I have no problem with changing the format either in one go or as
separate patches.

*Except* for `sp_not`: `if (! cond)` makes my eyes bleed. For me unary
operators act on the thing next to them, so a space before that makes
it less clear, not more.

Given that I'm the one that has worked on these bindings the most, and
probably will be the one that works on them the most in the future, I
would appreciate that small compromise on the coding style.


Felipe Contreras
notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org
To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-le...@notmuchmail.org

Reply via email to