[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Help-smalltalk] Small code clean up

From: Gwenaël Casaccio
Subject: Re: [Help-smalltalk] Small code clean up
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 10:01:13 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6

On 10/06/2013 08:10, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 11:40:09AM +0200, Gwenaël Casaccio wrote:

 From 4e074f382e7477c4e54ef50203f47af9a291f151 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gwenael Casaccio <address@hidden>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 11:27:19 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Remove useless optimizations
Commit messages are read in the future and they should enclose as much
information as relevant. E.g. it should explain of why today a simple
'^instVar' is faster (e.g. avoiding to create an activation context) but
also attempt to figure out if "^ip yourself" has ever been the preferred

I added a sentence to your commit message (so I am not going the entire
way) and it is currently beeing compiled and checked by travis-ci.

-       "This funny implementation thwarts the interpreter's optimizing effort"
thanks for removing that!

Subject: [PATCH] Removes old IBM code
"IBM code" is very generic. The first time I read it I thought you will
patch the iconv support to remove IBM charset conversion code. But you
are removing VisualAge for Smalltalk code. In general VAST is still around.

The commit message should explain why it is not needed. E.g. did newer
versions of VAST remove these selectors, do we have no interest to import
code from VAST anymore.

I see no interest to have code that is not tested and nobody is going to use.
If it was used everyday okay keep it but it's not the case and won't be.

I am not applying this patch right now as the commit message does not
provide any fact that help me to judge if it is useless code or not.


help-smalltalk mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]