On 2012-08-09 17:06, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
You have a nice way trying to say I'm a moron. Thank you. ;)
I am not trying to say that! I do not pretend to be any expert, and and
the more eyes the better.
Your patch isn't technically ideal as it does the same operation on data
multiple times. But seriously: we have wasted way more time and computing
power by doing this mail thread then the most ideal code solution will ever be
able to return.
Gotta love bikeshedding. ;-)
Just one thing: you do unreadLine(line), which adds "true" as second argument,
so a needless newline is appended that wasn't there before (and which causes a
deep copy of all that stuff for nothing). So unreadLine(line, false) should it
be. And I will not speak up again on this unless explicitely requested to ;)
I agree with a previous message stating that readAll will not affect
readLine, so I will drop the else unreadLine clause.
