Message199237
Antoine, how strongly do you feel about this? I confess I don't get it. Copy+paste code duplication doesn't help any of readability, correctness, or ease of future maintenance, so I guess it's some micro-efficiency concern. Really?! ;-)
Note that the patch doesn't _introduce_ calling the base class .release() - the code always did that. All it does is put the pre-existing code in a `with:` block. Minimal change. Yes, the pre-existing code had to be indented, but no non-whitespace character changed.
Of course in this case it's trivial either way. So if I have to duplicate the code to get your blessing, fine. On the other hand, since it _is_ trivial either way, I'd rather not bother ;-) |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2013-10-08 18:58:36 | tim.peters | set | recipients:
+ tim.peters, pitrou, vstinner, sbt |
2013-10-08 18:58:36 | tim.peters | set | messageid: <1381258716.17.0.244545182739.issue19158@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2013-10-08 18:58:36 | tim.peters | link | issue19158 messages |
2013-10-08 18:58:36 | tim.peters | create | |
|