chicken-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-users] [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix substring not checking


From: Michele La Monaca
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Fix substring not checking its number of arguments
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 18:33:59 +0100

Hi Peter,

On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Peter Bex <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Michele,
>
> Thanks for attempting to fix the situation.  However, it seems rather
> pointless to me to fix only this procedure.  There are numerous other
> procedures which have the same problem.  If this is to be fixed, I think
> all procedures should be fixed (and that's a shitload).

If you never start, you'll never complete the "endeavor". To me having
some functions accepting arbitrary number of parameters for no good
reason is pretty unacceptable, and frankly Chicken deserves a better
"presentation".

> Besides, why such a huge patch with explicit argument checkers?  It
> makes more sense to just use #!optional, which will automatically cause
> a check to be inserted.  It's simpler, shorter and less error-prone.

Yes, sure. I've also considered #!optional, but the original function
wasn't using it thus I just kept that way. I can rework the patch in
case.

> Finally, you before you try to "fix" things like leading tabs, please
> check the rest of the codebase first.  "fixing" this causes a massive
> inconsistency with the rest of the codebase: tabs are used everywhere.
> I also think tabs are evil, but I don't want to start a tabs vs spaces
> flamewar on these lists.  That's just how our current code style is, and
> you should try to alter that in only one place.  Trailing spaces should
> really be removed, but there are a few left in the code, and it's good to
> get rid of them as we find them.

It doesn't seem tabs are used consistently in the code base. E.g.,
looking at library.scm some functions use whitespaces, some tabs, most
a mix of them.

substring was in the last category so I just thought that having a
consistent style inside one function (at least) was a good thing.

Regards,
Michele



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]