From: Alberto Barbati (abarbati_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-23 15:13:18
Terje Slettebø ha scritto:
> That might be possible, but I don't know how much it buys you, as the use of
> base classes to factor out the special cases, means that there isn't that
> much code there. However, it seems you also realise here that you may need
> to consider both types, when selecting an implementation.
Now that I understand better your proposal, I can't but agree.
> What we could do, is that when I upload, and post about, the new update, you
> can look into it, and see if separating the two functions could make it
> better.
Sure I'll do it, although, from what I understand, your proposal is
already going to address my initial issues in a different, probably
better, way.
> I appreciate a lot the feedback I've got from you, Gennaro, Victor, Rob, and
> the others regarding this one, and you'll be credited.
This is the first time I post in this group and I was worried about
saying nonsenses (and getting kicked in the... ;)). I'm glad to hear
that my post was at least though-provoking, if not even useful.
> As Aleksey said it in the MPL review, you Boosters rock. :)
Indeed :)
> By the way, I realise that some of this may be confusing, as it refers to a
> version that hasn't yet been uploaded. It should be much clearer when it's
> uploaded, and things like the conversion table is provided.
I'm longing to see it!
Regards,
Alberto