On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, P. J. McDermott wrote:
> Fair enough. I think a separate hash could address both of these points:
>
> sub field_get($) {
> my ($field) = @_;
> return $FIELDS{$field} if exists $FIELDS{$field};
> foreach my $key (keys %FIELDS_RE) {
> return $FIELDS_RE{$key} if $field =~ m/^$key$/;
> }
> return undef;
> }
>
> Would this be acceptable?
Yes.
> Do you have a preference between the supplementary attribute and the
> separate hash?
I tend to prefer the separate hash currently. If I change my mind during
the review, it's easy to convert to the other way.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
