Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Mon Oct 12 05:48:50 -0700 2009: > I've finally gotten a chance to look at this. It looks good so far. Thanks for taking a look at it. > So I definitely don't want the second patch which changes the default > order. The configuration boolean is fine. (And if you want to add a > question to sup-config, that's icing on the cake.) I totally understand that, and that's why I did that part as a separate patch. > I would also like to disable forcing the loading of all messages. I can understand that too. > It is possible in Ferret: remove the DESC in ferret_index.rb line 160. > It is also possible in Xapian, but we're building the Xapian index to > optimize newest-first access. (Of course that would also be possible to > change, but then we're talking about a total index rebuild.) > > If you wanted to tweak that, the load-all-threads wouldn't be necessary. How do we get this behavior in xapian? I'm fine if the index is not optimized for this. The current newest-first optimization is perfect for actual searching, (as opposed to reading of new messages), and the patches don't change that. > Either way, I'm happy to merge the first patch with the "n = -1" thing > removed. I wouldn't want the patch accepted with just that change. It results in a "broken" view, (it claims to be showing the oldest message first, but it doesn't, and trying to scroll "up" to see earlier messages also doesn't work). So I'll see if I can figure out how to just load the N oldest message instead. (My working theory was that this perform similarly to actually loading all the messages, and that's why the patch just did that). > Pretty easy to change. In thread.rb, there's a date method which takes a > max; you can make it take a min instead. Excellent. I'll take a look at that. > The hard work for both of these things is wiring this option through. > Although $config is a global variable, I don't really want to use it > directly in e.g. thread.rb. OK. I'll see if there's nearby code to mimic for this. -Carl > > PS. We're still total ruby newbies, so please point out any silly > > mistakes we're missing with respect to ruby idioms. > > Everything looks good. The only slgihtly non-idiomatic thing is using > "if !x" instead of "unless x". Heh. Just today I noticed "unless" while poking around in some sup code. I have to say that "unless ... else" seems like a downright malicious construct to unleash against people reading code.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ sup-talk mailing list sup-talk@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk