On Thu, 1 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello, Lyncei,
>
> Please consider the following:
>
> ########################################################################
> %%% Created Thu Mar 1 09:13:59 MST 2001 by target lynx.patch. %%%
> diff -ru orig/lynx2-8-4/src/LYCharUtils.c lynx2-8-4/src/LYCharUtils.c
> --- orig/lynx2-8-4/src/LYCharUtils.c Mon Feb 26 19:41:57 2001
> +++ lynx2-8-4/src/LYCharUtils.c Thu Mar 1 08:54:11 2001
> @@ -3623,11 +3623,10 @@
> : me->node_anchor->address[4]) == 's') {
> str = "s";
> }
> - if (TRACE) {
> - CTRACE((tfp, "LYLegitimizeHREF: Bad value '%s' for http%s URL.\n",
> - *href, str);)
ok (I thought I caught all of those).
if(TRACE) ... CTRACE is redundant, btw, but it makes it a lot simpler to
find.
> - CTRACE((tfp, " Stripping lead dots.\n"));
> - } else if (!me->inBadHREF) {
> + CTRACE((tfp, "LYLegitimizeHREF: Bad value '%s' for http%s URL.\n",
> + *href, str));
> + CTRACE((tfp, " Stripping lead dots.\n"));
> + if (!me->inBadHREF) {
> HTUserMsg(BAD_PARTIAL_REFERENCE);
> me->inBadHREF = TRUE;
> }
> ########################################################################
>
> for at lease a couple reasons:
>
> o The ");)" sequence is probably a typo and should be "));". This
> appeared only in dev.19. At best, it's esthetically jarring.
> In fact, it interfered with a hack I was trying to perform to
> call CTRACE within expressions.
>
> o The "else" also bothers me. It causes some code (a message and
> an assignment) to be performed only in the case that tracing is
> turned off. This strikes me as bad practice.
I've noticed something like that before, decided that Fote was trying
to move warning messages off the screen into the trace file.
>
> Thanks,
> gil
>
--
T.E.Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://dickey.his.com
ftp://dickey.his.com
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
