Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 15:16:23 +0300 From: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r395409 - head/astro/geographiclib Message-ID: <20150827121623.GJ41937@hades.panopticon> In-Reply-To: <55DEF7C2.4080901@marino.st> References: <201508270944.t7R9ia0R067164@repo.freebsd.org> <20150827100953.GA78107@FreeBSD.org> <20150827105912.GF41937@hades.panopticon> <55DEEFC2.40309@marino.st> <20150827113301.GH41937@hades.panopticon> <55DEF7C2.4080901@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* John Marino (freebsd.contact@marino.st) wrote: > >> I thought it had been clearly established (by mat@ IIRC) that this kind > >> of response is not acceptable as a reason for ports mistakes. The > >> committer is supposed to review the port he or she is committing and > >> catch errors. The maintainers simply don't have the same level of > >> experience as committers do. > > > > I'll repeat the same thing I've said back then: I don't see it as > > a mistake, that is exactly why I've committed it without modification. > > > > "There's no difference whether variable is assigned with or without > > expansion as long as the assigned value does not contain other variable > > references" - that's what I'd answer if you asked _why_ I committed it > > as-is, but you've asked another question, and that question may only > > be directed to maintainer. > > I consider it a mistake that got past me (and several maintainers that > committed to those lines after me). Now that I'm thinking about it, it > may have been part of a complex loop to define it where ":=" was > necessary and I simplified it but didn't change the assignment operator. If it bugs you, you can just fix it anytime. > Regardless, there's been a pattern of "well, in my opinion this is fine" > defenses even when it's against the PHB and I don't get the point of > even having documentation if people are going to use their judgement > even if contradicts 90% of everyone else. > > I think judgement comes into play when there's no documentation. I > would be interested in knowing if documentation states to prefer lazy > evaluation over immediate assignment. Obviously that would affect this > ongoing discussion that seems to show up in multiple forms. There's nothing in PHB which forbids use of := in this case. And the reality is such that you just can't document absolutely anything, and even documented things may be documented wrong or be obsolete, so regardless of whether there's documentation, judgement always has priority. -- Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D amdmi3@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru http://amdmi3.ru
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150827121623.GJ41937>