On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 09:50:32PM +0100, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 28/03/2021 21:05, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > The patch clearly mentions that it is a "rework".
> > If the maintainer likes it, it would be nice if it can be simplified but
> > this may not be possible.
>
> Of course it's /poss
> 在 2021年3月29日，04:50，Derek Buitenhuis 写道：
>
> On 28/03/2021 21:05, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> The patch clearly mentions that it is a "rework".
>> If the maintainer likes it, it would be nice if it can be simplified but
>> this may not be possible.
>
> Of course it's /possible/. People have be
Am So., 28. März 2021 um 22:58 Uhr schrieb Derek Buitenhuis
:
>
> On 28/03/2021 21:05, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> > The patch clearly mentions that it is a "rework".
> > If the maintainer likes it, it would be nice if it can be simplified but
> > this may not be possible.
>
> Of course it's /possibl
On 28/03/2021 21:05, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> The patch clearly mentions that it is a "rework".
> If the maintainer likes it, it would be nice if it can be simplified but
> this may not be possible.
Of course it's /possible/. People have been splitting rewrites/refactors into
these since forever;
Am Sa., 27. März 2021 um 17:45 Uhr schrieb Derek Buitenhuis
:
>
> On 22/03/2021 22:25, zsugabubus wrote:
> > Compared to previous implementation, this rework tries to:
> >
> > - Improve code quality,
> > - Provide better error handling (also: reduce numerous (potential)
> > memory leaks),
> > - B
On 22/03/2021 22:25, zsugabubus wrote:
> Compared to previous implementation, this rework tries to:
>
> - Improve code quality,
> - Provide better error handling (also: reduce numerous (potential)
> memory leaks),
> - Broader coverage of the standard:
> * multiple periods,
> * multiple base
