Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> writes: > In many places, we do thinks like: > 1. test that we have a identifier. > 2. immediately follow that with access to parts of the > tree as identifiers, but check again that we really > an identifier, etc. > > There is nothing silly about that.
Sure, it's a common and useful pattern. I'm just saying it's silly to call it "..._p" in that case... -miles -- 雨上がり に歩いて、風 柔らかい
