Andreas Raab a écrit :
nicolas cellier wrote:
Keep on doing good work Edgar.
That's a simple error of procedure. You cannot be your own reviewer.
Someone else has to do it.
So who *has* reviewed the changes? Nobody? When was the last time that
changes to *hundreds* of methods have been introduced in the image
without any review whatsoever? I thought one of the goals of the 3.10
process was to improve code quality?
Whatever. I only have to glance at Dan's snippet to tell you that
there will be plenty of situations where it will identify places that
would be completely wrong to change. You cannot take this and
automatically convert those comparisons. To give just one example, it
is commonplace to use loops like this:
obj := 0 someObject.
[0 == obj] whileFalse:[
"... do something ..."
obj := obj nextObject.
].
In my image alone there are 17 senders of #nextObject, *all* of which
exhibit this pattern. I'm certain there are other patterns like it.
Anyway, except ImageSegment, other zealous conversions should be
harmless.
Questionnable, unneeded, but harmless.
I can *guarantee* that this is assumption is wrong.
Cheers,
- Andreas
_______________________________________________
V3dot10 mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/v3dot10
Oh yes, very bad case! because the loop will exit on first 0.0
encountered...
Quite same as ImageSegment bug.
What I called zealous was the non-arithmetic tests changed by side effect
(like == #someSymbol or == nil...)
I did not even notice some 0== or ==0 are not arithmetic...
Thanks!
_______________________________________________
V3dot10 mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/v3dot10
