> Thanks for splitting this change out. I have to say I find the original > quite a bit easier to read. If you're worried about the code added in > the next commit being too indented perhaps you could move the body of > the if statement into a separate function. Then we're just swapping if statement depth for function call depth, which seems even worse. I think the confusion comes from adding the "ret:" part which is currently unnecessary so I can get rid of that this patch. Thanks
