Brad Roberts wrote:
> Just shows how seldom there's an obviously right path to choose.

I tend to deal with things in closely related groups, because the thing is complicated. Getting up to speed on one issue, then dealing with the issues closely related to it, is much more efficient than hopping around.

Georg Wrede wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Robert Clipsham wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> 314 does not affect correct code, hence is an implicitly less important issue.
>>>
>>> It does however include a patch, submitted almost a year ago I might add.
>>
>> Yes, but the patch is incomplete.
> 
> At the time I'm reading this, I see in the thread window that Cristian and Jarrett have already answered this particular post.
> 
> However, I take such an offence that I (against my normal behavior) post a reply here before even bothering to read theirs first.
> 
> 
> 
> If you consider a patch incomplete, wouldn't it be more appropriate to address the issue, than waiting (days, years??) before you get put back-to-wall about it???
> 
> Just posting what's wrong or missing with the patch right away would catch the patch poster _while_ he's _still_ got it in his head.
> 
> Geeezzzz...................................
> 

If this is important to you, wouldn't it be more appropriate to look into making the patch complete instead of complaining about it?

Andrei

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> If this is important to you, wouldn't it be more appropriate to look into making the patch complete instead of complaining about it?
> 
> Andrei

The poster of the patch believes it to be complete. Walter looks at it and believes that it is not. It adds perhaps one minute to the time it takes Walter to deal with the patch to add a comment on the bug saying that the patch isn't complete and giving a brief description of the situation in which it fails.

This is not the case with bugzilla 314, wherein the person who posted the patch claimed that it was incomplete.

On Wed, 13 May 2009 06:56:03 -0400, Christopher Wright <dhasenan@gmail.com> wrote:

> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> If this is important to you, wouldn't it be more appropriate to look into making the patch complete instead of complaining about it?
>>  Andrei
>
> The poster of the patch believes it to be complete. Walter looks at it and believes that it is not. It adds perhaps one minute to the time it takes Walter to deal with the patch to add a comment on the bug saying that the patch isn't complete and giving a brief description of the situation in which it fails.
>
> This is not the case with bugzilla 314, wherein the person who posted the patch claimed that it was incomplete.

314 is the subject of this thread.  I have to side with Walter on this, the comment (by Christian) says:

"Using a variation of this patch to fix the import issue bugs 313 and 314 describe should still be fine."

Which seems to indicate using this patch directly would not fix it.

-Steve