Re: [PATCH 0/3] ruby: get rid of Tags object
On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 5:18 PM David Bremner wrote: > > Felipe Contreras 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. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras ___ notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-le...@notmuchmail.org
Re: [PATCH 0/3] ruby: get rid of Tags object
Felipe Contreras 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. d ___ notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-le...@notmuchmail.org
[PATCH 0/3] ruby: get rid of Tags object
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); // Store it for later tags_1 = notmuch_message_get_tags(message); // Traverse it This iterator is meant to be transient and works only once, so we better just iterate it once. Felipe Contreras (3): ruby: add tags helper ruby: tags: return string array directly ruby: remove Tags object bindings/ruby/database.c | 2 +- bindings/ruby/defs.h | 6 + bindings/ruby/init.c | 14 --- bindings/ruby/message.c | 2 +- bindings/ruby/messages.c | 2 +- bindings/ruby/tags.c | 54 bindings/ruby/thread.c | 2 +- 7 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-) -- 2.39.2.13.g1fb56cf030 ___ notmuch mailing list -- notmuch@notmuchmail.org To unsubscribe send an email to notmuch-le...@notmuchmail.org
