https://codereview.appspot.com/51350044/diff/1/quickstart/app.py#newcode467
quickstart/app.py:467: # specific unit. For this reason, we exit the for
loop here.
On 2014/01/17 15:20:15, bac wrote:
> You don't sound convinced. Any chance that assumption is wrong? The
penalty
> for looping over the rest non-matching items is trivial. But if
you're sure,
> maybe keep this logic but change the comment to be more confident.
Please take a look.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/51350044/ diff/1/ quickstart/ app.py
File quickstart/app.py (right):
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/51350044/ diff/1/ quickstart/ app.py# newcode467 app.py: 467: # specific unit. For this reason, we exit the for
quickstart/
loop here.
On 2014/01/17 15:20:15, bac wrote:
> You don't sound convinced. Any chance that assumption is wrong? The
penalty
> for looping over the rest non-matching items is trivial. But if
you're sure,
> maybe keep this logic but change the comment to be more confident.
Done.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/51350044/ diff/1/ quickstart/ app.py# newcode481 app.py: 481: # We assume the mega-watcher contains a single
quickstart/
change for each
On 2014/01/17 15:20:15, bac wrote:
> As above.
Done.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/51350044/