On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:52:14AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> The code managing DRCs[0] has quite a few things that are more
> complicated than they need to be. In particular the object
> representing a DRC has a bunch of method pointers, despite the fact
> that there are currently no
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:25:41PM -0500, Michael Roth wrote:
> Quoting Bharata B Rao (2017-05-31 23:06:46)
> > On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:52:14AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > > The code managing DRCs[0] has quite a few things that are more
> > > complicated than they need to be. In particular
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 09:36:46AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:52:14AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > The code managing DRCs[0] has quite a few things that are more
> > complicated than they need to be. In particular the object
> > representing a DRC has a bunch of
Quoting Bharata B Rao (2017-05-31 23:06:46)
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:52:14AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> > The code managing DRCs[0] has quite a few things that are more
> > complicated than they need to be. In particular the object
> > representing a DRC has a bunch of method pointers,
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 11:52:14AM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> The code managing DRCs[0] has quite a few things that are more
> complicated than they need to be. In particular the object
> representing a DRC has a bunch of method pointers, despite the fact
> that there are currently no
The code managing DRCs[0] has quite a few things that are more
complicated than they need to be. In particular the object
representing a DRC has a bunch of method pointers, despite the fact
that there are currently no subclasses, and even if there were the
method implementations would be unlikely
