Re: [Patch] Locate: Move counting and limit-checking into visitors.

[Buzz]

Op Wed, 15 Jun 2005 21:33:16 +0100 schreef James Youngman
in <address@hidden>:
:  On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 10:10:55PM +0200, Bas van Gompel wrote:
: > Hi,
: >
: > Following patch moves limit-checking and counting into visitors.
: > When neither is done, a visitor is added which will increment
: > items_accepted once, then remove itself from the list.
:
:  I like visit_count() and visit_limit() but I'm not sure about
:  visit_found().  The latter is interesting but complicates the code -
:  what are the benefits that make it worthwhile to make the code more
:  complex?  I admit that the difference is small.

If you don't have visit_found, you can't determine whether anything was
found, and therefore it will be impossible to set the returnvalue of
the program sensibly. Having to do visit_count every time would be
slower.

:  I'd prefer to adopt visit_count() and visit_limit() but not
:  visit_found().  However, if you can think of a strong agrument in
:  favour of visit_found() I could be convinced.  

Does the above convince you?


L8r,

Buzz.
-- 
  ) |  | ---/ ---/  Yes, this | This message consists of true | I do not
--  |  |   /    /   really is |   and false bits entirely.    | mail for
  ) |  |  /    /    a 72 by 4 +-------------------------------+ any1 but
--  \--| /--- /---  .sigfile. |   |perl -pe "s.u(z)\1.as."    | me. 4^re