Hi, On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 23:05:39 +0400, Anton wrote: [...] > If you think that w/o splitting and debugging changes the patch would be > far smaller, you are very wrong. I don't really have an interest in discussing this to death. We just expect large patches to be split into smaller patches, each introducing a single change (pretty much like the linux kernel development works).
If you submit a reasonably split set of patches we'll definitely take the time to review and discuss it, or point out when a patch violates the "one patch, one feature" rule. [typedefs] > > Well, if I see > > std::pair<string, string> file; > > You got error here: it's pair<string,fileinfo_t>. With typedef you are > safe from errors like that. In fact I merely wrote that as an example, however you instantly spotted a potential error since an explicit type was used instead of a annonymous typedef. Or to paraphrase you, "with typedef such errors are hidden from you". So bottom line is there's no "better" here, just preference, and you may want to take the maintainers' preference into consideration. HTH, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Zurich, Switzerland http://jw.smts.ch _______________________________________________ crux-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.crux.nu/mailman/listinfo/crux-devel
