Re: MISSING Subcommand

[Ben Pfaff]

John Darrington <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm wondering if there's a better way we can implement the /MISSING
> subcommand which appears in nearly all of the stats commands.
> Currently, it's up to each procedure to explicitly implement it, which
> is both a pain and error prone.
>
> Perhaps we could pass a parameter to the case_reader when its
> constructed so that it returns only the appropriate cases?

How about writing a function to do this that can be used by each
procedure after calling casereader_read()?  I'm not sure that
this really belongs in the case_reader: currently it doesn't have
any knowledge about what's in the data it's dealing with.
-- 
"Because computer source code is an expressive means for the exchange
 of information and ideas about computer programming, we hold that it
 is protected by the First Amendment."
--Hon. Boyce F. Martin, Jr., for the 6th Circuit Court, Junger vs. Daley