> The general idea being that there is no reason to be "clever" for no
> reason, esp. as we have to do that too often anyway.
#2 and #3 are easier to read than #1 because you don't
have to match two 'foo' references that are 3 lines apart.
#2 is almost always better than #3 because it's shorter
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 17:04 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 11:29 -0400, James Antill wrote:
> > There's no need to make this a multiline list generator, just using a
> > for loop and append() is basically identical speed wise ... and stupid
> > people like me can more easily
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:58 PM, James Antill wrote:
> ---
> yum/history.py | 4 +---
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/yum/history.py b/yum/history.py
> index a9b12cf..bbd9bf2 100644
> --- a/yum/history.py
> +++ b/yum/history.py
> @@ -1296,10 +1296,8 @@ class
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:58 PM, James Antill wrote:
> ---
> yum/history.py | 13 -
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/yum/history.py b/yum/history.py
> index bbd9bf2..60a496d 100644
> --- a/yum/history.py
> +++ b/yum/history.py
> @@ -738,6 +738,8 @@
On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 11:29 -0400, James Antill wrote:
> There's no need to make this a multiline list generator, just using a
> for loop and append() is basically identical speed wise ... and stupid
> people like me can more easily read it :).
You'll notice that we really want to annoy people wh
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 10:00 -0400, Zdenek Pavlas wrote:
> > I meant that traditionally to have packages "move arch" we had
> > them obsolete older versions of themselves in their specfiles.
>
> Oh, now I see. That shouldn't hurt, but is it necessary?
>
> I feel this somewhat makes 'arch' part o
