Re: [PATCH] Choose syntax

[Leonard den Ottolander <leonard den ottolander nl>]

Hello Pavel,

On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 17:02, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> Instead of a macro you could use the following construct:
> 
> static const int MAX_ENTRY_LEN = 40;

Yes, I could to that. Why do you feel this is a cleaner approach?
> -		    edit_load_syntax (edit, 0, 0);
> +		    if (option_auto_syntax)
> +			edit_load_syntax (edit, 0, 0);
> +		    else
> +			edit_load_syntax (edit, 0, option_syntax_type);

> Isn't it possible to handle `option_auto_syntax' inside edit_load_syntax() ?

That would require the function to reset the last parameter to NULL in
case of option_auto_syntax (option_syntax_time is not necessarily NULL
in this case). That is entirely possible, but I'm not sure if changing
the interface of the function (it currently decides it's action on the
value of that last parameter) is the most obvious and clean approach...
Otoh the call of the function looks cleaner... Hm. I'll have to think
about this a bit.

Leonard.

-- 
mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research