On Sun Feb 3 2013 Sriram Karra wrote:
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Sriram Karra karra@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, February 2, 2013, Roland Winkler wrote
Currently I am hesitant to make such changes because it could become
difficult to ensure the overall consistency between what happens in
different parts of BBDB. I'll keep your patch in mind, but I do not
want to promise that I want to add such a patch in the near future.
Although I leave the final call on this to you, I am just a bit
curious because I feel your position stated above is somewhat
different from the one in our earlier thread, reproduced in part
below. Specifically I took the earlier conversation to mean you
had agreed that we could put in some filtering out code right now,
even before we find a valid use case for having text properties in
the database. Was it just a misunderstanding on my part?
I am not sure I understand what you mean. What do you mean here by
filtering out code? Where should this happen? Do you want to
change things high-level, where we feed BBDB, or low-level, where
things are actually stored in the db, or do you want to change
things somewhere in between?
What I wanted to say below refered to the first and the last of the
above three issues:
- When grabbing text for BBDB, the respective high-level code should
make sure that text properties ARE removed so that they do not
enter BBDB (because currently BBDB cannot make use of them).
Yet as a matter of clarity it should be clear where this cleaning
happens.
- Somewhere in between high- and low-level code, the BBDB should
make sure that text properties are NOT removed by function calls
such as substring-no-properties that can be replaced by calls
such as substring.
Once there are more meaningful applications for these text
properties in BBDB (I have some rather vague ideas in mind, too
vague to get into any coding efforts), then one can think about the
last step of how to include text properties low-level in the db
itself, including a user variable that disables this feature without
corrupting the overall integrity of the database. As I am a bit
worried about the last point, I do not want to do anything along
these lines before I have thought it through more carefully.
Does this make sense?
Roland
Roland said:
Sriram said:
Roland said:
Yet all the text processing in between the grabbing of text
strings and adding them to the database should preserve text
properties.
Makes a lot of sense. And we could do all this even before we come
up with any real use of having text properties in the database,
making it more flexible but keeping the database format more
predictable for those who desire it to be so.
Exactly.
--
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_jan
___
bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/