On Monday 23 April 2007 17:10, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> > It's three lines; is it worth extracting somehow?
>
> It could definitely be placed inside start_flatten(), but that would
> make the code a little misleading, I think. I'm not sure it's worth
> placing it in a function of its own; the trans
chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sunday 22 April 2007 17:38, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> The attached patch completely reworks Parrot_process_args. The changes
> are extensive and I think they make the code much clearer. Rather than
> just check it in, I thought I'd try to get feedback here t
On Sunday 22 April 2007 17:38, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> The attached patch completely reworks Parrot_process_args. The changes
> are extensive and I think they make the code much clearer. Rather than
> just check it in, I thought I'd try to get feedback here to make sure
> that it is clearer to eve
