From: Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com>
To: David Edmondson <dme@dme.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v4] emacs: Re-implement advance/rewind functions of
	notmuch-show-mode.
In-Reply-To: <cunpqfbtxu2.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>
References: <id:"1324553312-10972-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org">
	<1324665712-2419-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org>
	<87ipl7kt82.fsf@gmail.com>
	<cunpqfbtxu2.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.10.2+135~gb811a3c (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 15:09:55 +0400
Message-ID: <87fwg71tdo.fsf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: list

Hi David.

On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 10:46:13 +0000, David Edmondson <dme@dme.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 23:01:33 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > * Revert changes to notmuch-show-advance-and-archive.
> 
> Why? (I mean, because the change is poor or just that it's unrelated or
> because I didn't mention it)
> 

Because it is unrelated.

And can you please explain why `when' is better than `if' here?  Then I
will know which one to use the next time :)

> > * Can we split this in two patches?  One for rewind and another for
> >   advance.
> 
> I'll think about that. Is there a specific reason? I'm not particularly
> in favour of splitting things just for the sake of it.
> 

Because they are independent and can be split.  And it is easier to
review (and work in general, I suppose) with two smaller patches than
with a single bigger one.

Though, since you got two other reviews already, you can just ignore
this.

> > * Does this patch change the behavior of the functions or is it just
> >   meant to simplify the code?  If it is the former, it would be really
> >   nice to have tests for it.
> 
> I believe that it changes the behaviour. I'll write tests.

Thanks.

Regards,
  Dmitry