Allen Li <vianchielfa...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:56 PM, Tim Cross <theophil...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> To correctly fix this, I feel more analysis is warranted. I'm prepared >> to look at this and present a summary and options, but it will have to >> wait until after 21st when I start leave from work. It is a complex area >> and perhaps my skills won't be up to it, but I should at least be able >> to identify the main areas needing attention/decisions. > > My initial approach would be to do some refactoring here, especially > among org-2ft, org-matcher-time, and org-parse-time-string, each of > which calls the others in a cycle and each share a part of the logic > for interpreting Org mode timestamps. > > I'm not familiar with refactoring FOSS code via mailed patches, nor if > Org maintainers would welcome such patches, but I would be willing to > do some refactoring here. >
I think what I will do is start with adding/extending the tests relating to timestamps and clock tables. This should - help ensure I understand the required functionality - may help identify existing bugs - help ensure any refactoring does not have undesired side effects or loss of functionality I also suspect it will be a good way for core org maintainers to verify I'm on the right track and haven't missed anything before making any changes to the code base. I'm not a big TDD advocate, but when working with an unfamiliar code base, I've found developing tests first is a good approach to ensure you really do understand existing and required functionality. regards, Tim -- Tim Cross
