So the argument is that authors will never call apply themselves. Only browsers would. If you can come up with a use case where authors need to call apply function with a boolean value, then I'm more than happy to drop the boolean argument and just have apply, unapply, reapply.
- Ryosuke On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Aryeh Gregor <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <[email protected]> wrote: > > void apply(in boolean isReapply) > > I haven't been following the substance of apply vs. reapply etc., but > as I said before, could you not make this a boolean argument? How are > authors supposed to remember whether it's apply(true) that means > reapply or apply(false)? You should instead make the argument > something that contains the word "reapply" somewhere, like maybe a > space-separated list of case-insensitive tokens where any token other > than "reapply" is ignored. So you'd do apply("reapply") if you wanted > to reapply, and other flags could be added later if desired. This is > both more comprehensible and more extensible. >
