Re: [Nano-devel] snipping almost twenty lines out of the commenting code

[Mike Scalora]

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Benno Schulenberg
<address@hidden> wrote:
>...
> Thinking about it, a better way to prevent the unwanted undo item
> presented itself.  It even gets rid of the file_changed bool.  See the
> first patch again.

That's better.

>> I'm not a fan of using a global to eliminate a function but given how
>> much you value fewer lines and the historical use of globals in the
>> codebase I guess it's the thing to do.
>
> I don't like globals either.  We could pass it to add_undo(), but that
> would mean that twenty other calls would have to pass NULL -- that's a
> waste too.  I tried a different way in the second patch, but that doesn't
> make things cleaner either.

I like that better. I'm neck deep in indent code right now, just last
night I was thinking that tabsize should be a per-file variable.

> And... only now it occurs to me to just set
> openfile->current_undo->strdata right after the add_undo in do_comment.
> Pfff, easy.  No need for any global.  Just a little tweaking of the undo
> item after creating it because it's too much work to pass the data.

Would it be heresy to suggest a variadic function?

> Benno