[Maxima-commits] [git] Maxima CAS branch, master, updated. branch-5_31-base-204-g29fe517

Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> writes:
>     Rupert>   <snip long explanation of P,PT etc.>
>
> Ah, that seems nicer.  Perhaps a short comment documenting this
> convention will be helpful?

Good point. I'll put one at the top of the file.

> That's why I said it's hard.  Maybe if you say "document", but also
> note that you're changing the code.  I just read one of the commits
> and I think the log said it was documenting the code.  And then
> further on I saw that lots of code also changed.  

Yep, sorry :-/

> My personal preference is that if you figured it, document it.  Then
> change it.  Or if you change it first, commit the change and the
> documentation at the same time.

Cool. To be honest, with complicated code, it seems to be easiest to
"convert as I understand" ("Oh, that bit does *that*. Let's write it as
a loop then" etc.). So I'm afraid it will tend to be single commits. But
I'll try to make the commit message more informative.

> Git has no problem with too many commits. :-) It's the gigantic single
> commits that are burden on the user and future git bisects.

I agree! One of the customers I'm dealing with at work at the moment
uses svn. They seem pretty new to the whole coding as a team thing, so
maybe it's not entirely the tools' fault, but I'm really getting a feel
for how good git is! (And using git svn...)

Rupert
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/attachments/20131208/3773ff81/attachment.pgp>;