On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 06:53:46PM -0800, Danek Duvall wrote:
> It's not really an objection, but if it were, it would be that it seems a
> bit odd to define a function to use precisely once, rather than just doing
> the variable manipulation in-line. If it makes sense to encapsulate it as
> a function -- which it seems to me it does, if it is this common function
> -- then that's fine, but either give it a name that's tells us what it is
> ("Oh, that's a heaviside step function, I know what that does (or can look
> it up") or tells us in a comment. As it is "H_whatever" adds no
> descriptive value. But if you do reference Heaviside, then please explain
> why it's not exactly that -- including both the different step value and
> why there are two steps instead of just the one.
Ok. I will give this function a more descriptive name, and add a
comment. If you're opposed to having the function here entirely, I'll
compute the usage bonus in-line.
-j
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
