Hi Tom, On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 at 15:38, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 11:36:20AM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 at 18:35, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 09, 2025 at 03:29:55AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > The code at the end of iter_inc() is already somewhat tortuous. Before > > > > making it worse, move it into a function. > > > > > > This is not a great commit message. Taking a look at v2 as a whole, the > > > reason to extract this logic from the end of iter_inc is because you > > > will be checking it in multiple places. That is a good reason to move > > > the code. Adding another 5 lines of code (a single if test) alone would > > > not be. > > > > OK, so how about: > > > > The code at the end of iter_inc() is already somewhat tortuous. A future > > series needs to call it in from two places in iter_inc(), so move it > > into a function. > > No, I dropped the "already somewhat tortuous" part on purpose, because > it's just normal regular easy to understand code. It's on that threshold > of indentation where you could break it out, or you could leave it, and > be fine. The entire reason to split it out is because it will be called > in multiple places.
OK, so how about: We will want to use this same logic in another place within iter_inc(), so split it out into its own function. Otherwise, please suggest something. Regards, Simon
