From: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>
To: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] cli: mime node: abstract decryption and signature
	verification
In-Reply-To: <87k3opiz71.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
References:
 <a9f12ba474fc51df71e2fd2b7a20a8d101729c6e.1362319765.git.jani@nikula.org>
	<d250faaac8aae1f6383b7a77e84e4b4144791688.1362319765.git.jani@nikula.org>
	<87k3opiz71.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.2+48~gc5630bf (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.2.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 15:17:46 +0200
Message-ID: <87ppyhrpqd.fsf@nikula.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: list

On Sat, 30 Mar 2013, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote:
> Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org> writes:
>
>> The code filled with #ifdef GMIME_ATLEAST_26 is difficult to
>> read. Abstract the decryption and signature verification into
>> functions, with separate implementations for GMime 2.4 and 2.6, to
>> clarify the code.
>
> This series mostly looks OK, although it's a challenge to track all the
> code movement.

I agree it is. Personally I just tried to look at support for either 2.4
or 2.6 at a time, and compare the old and new code paths, to wrap my
head around it.

BTW I didn't test the 2.4 support, I don't have a system with that
anymore.

> I'd like some way to make it more obvious to the reader which version of
> the functions they are reading (when the #ifdef GMIME_ATLEAST_26 has
> scrolled off screen). The simplest would just be a comment in front of
> each function.

That feels a bit excessive, but perhaps that is just because I'm very
accustomed to this style of conditional build. I can add the comments.

BR,
Jani.