[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation
From: |
John Darrington |
Subject: |
Re: [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation |
Date: |
Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:25:36 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 05:37:32AM +0000, Ben Pfaff wrote:
In prompt.[ch], could the functions be renamed to put "prompt" at the
beginning? e.g. get_prompt_style -> prompt_get_style and so on. This
would make it clear at a glance that they come from a module named
"prompt".
OK.
I think that the function source is only used in DO REPEAT. I wonder
whether it should be merged in with it. It seems like the
function_source is a really thin wrapper around getl_interface now; it
was less apparently "thin" before, because it *was* the exposed
interface.
You're right. I'll make struct repeat_block implement
getl_interface. That will mean that function.[ch] is not needed, and
will be much neater.
J'
--
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3
fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285 A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://pgp.mit.edu or any PGP keyserver for public key.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, John Darrington, 2006/11/16
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, John Darrington, 2006/11/16
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, Ben Pfaff, 2006/11/18
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, Ben Pfaff, 2006/11/24
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, John Darrington, 2006/11/26
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, John Darrington, 2006/11/26
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, Ben Pfaff, 2006/11/29
- Re: [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation,
John Darrington <=
- [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, John Darrington, 2006/11/29
- Re: [patch #5562] line-buffer / getl_ reorganisation, Ben Pfaff, 2006/11/28