Re: Allows minimum-length to work for end-of-line spanners. (issue 7453046)

[dak]

On 2013/03/17 07:10:23, MikeSol wrote:
> On 2013/03/11 10:18:59, dak wrote:
> >
> > There is no point in hiding the symptoms of a problem away.  That
only
> > makes things even harder in future.

> I don't think this is a problem blocking the current patch.

It is a problem making the current patch ill-fitting and ill-advised.

> You are right that the current multiple functions of minimum-length
> are problematic.  I'm not arguing that this is someone else's
> problem - I am arguing that this (like all bugs) is the community's
> problem.

Since you don't care for fixing this yourself, you _are_ arguing that
this is someone else's problem.

> It may take months or years to sort out the multiple naming of
> properties.

It will if people just heap on new "features" that can't be made to
work consistently and blame "the community" for the lack of solid
groundwork.

> This shouldn't block this patch from being pushed.

I disagree.  There is no mythical beast called "community" that
magically fixes things.  Code gets fixed by people working on that
area who are leaving the code base in a better state than they found
them.  But that's not your attitude.  Your attitude is that if the
code base is bad, that is the perfect excuse to make it worse.

You want to achieve a certain thing in an area that can't be done
cleanly due to design errors.  And you draw the "community" card for
who should be doing it.  But who should do the groundwork for your
features if not you?  Who is most intimate with the area you are
working on?  If you feel fine heaping inconsistent and incomplete
features on for the sake of getting your own work done, you are free
to do so in a branch.

I have pointed out completely undocumented code from you in the past,
like with partial elliptic stencils.  You have not bothered adding a
single line of documentation yet, and as one consequence people are
unable to use it for improving the woodwind diagrams.

You don't fix your own work after it has been committed, so why would
you fix inconsistencies afterwards that you felt ok to ignore in the
first place?  Who is going to fix them?  "the community".  Please try
acting as a part of "the community" instead of piling work on for "the
community" that "somebody else (TM)" will at some time solve.


https://codereview.appspot.com/7453046/