BTW
Are you busy now?
I'm sorry, I'm so busy for my full time work :( Anyway, I'm trying to review serious bug patches or
bug reports first.
Other patches, such as clean-up or code refactoring, may take some time to review.
I am waiting for your reply about "integrates dir-entry getting and
validation" patch.
As I know, your patch is being under review by Namjae.
I already gave comments and a patch, but you said you can't do it.
I'm sorry, But I can't accept an incomplete patch. I will directly fix it later.
Of course, I understand that you can't accept a under-discussed patch.
I think you know what I'm trying to do, with previous patches.
Unfortunately, I couldn't implement it properly using the patch you provided.
But I don't think the checksum and name-lenth issues should be left unresolved.
(How do you think?)
So I want you to think with me.
I still feel we haven't discussed this enough.
I still don't understand what you think is the problem with the patch.
Where and what kind of problems do you think the patch has?
- performance?
- wrong behavior?
- readability?
- runtime cost?
- style?
- other?
I think I explained the reason for each implementation.
If it's not enough, I'd like to explain it in more detail.
BR
---
Tetsuhiro Kohada <kohada.t2@xxxxxxxxx>
