From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F1659CAF for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:33:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BE67B21C05F; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:33:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C58321C019 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:33:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [128.39.168.195] (ka-195.studby.hig.no [128.39.168.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bernalex) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D5B3A340B54 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --search-fuzzy and --search-fuzzy-cutoff options (bug 65566) To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <1459746182-13420-1-git-send-email-zmedico@gentoo.org> <57022835.2060304@gentoo.org> <57074E05.4030202@gentoo.org> From: Alexander Berntsen X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <570796ED.8040608@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:33:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57074E05.4030202@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 7f1dedd0-0eb3-4fcb-a7c2-6192fb0e6b05 X-Archives-Hash: 08371269361edc43804e8e6b03a85a73 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 08/04/16 08:21, Zac Medico wrote: > Reverse? You want it to measure dissimilarity? Not sure what you > mean. Sorry, I meant reverse the *docs* to mean "find things that are at least 50% similar" rather than "cut off things that aren't above the 0.5 threshold". I.e. use an inclusive sentence. I feel that this is more clear. > I just want it to fail if the input is invalid. Yes, I just realised you checked if it were <=, not just <. I think this is a bad idea. It's easily missed -- I just missed it last time around. I would suggest to make it fail early, rather than set it to 0.0 which you then set to None. Just set it to None immediately. - -- Alexander bernalex@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXB5bsAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BSO8QAKXJlxYpetrA8kKbvW/cknoO wrLPkHsmn7imnfQddcXVHtE+K1GJCRcG1Eu2VD+Pqza3HLRPl20eTm8+iu+maftk K41+SCNEb8qs9v05P2wcqPxtUlzI4OO9GwJFJkbycRxgCFtCYnM/0B2kXaSKOkHr KY4cF9CbdzfwIYL2FkmaCJrCBI9ac1sjsnug9yN+wXIYVV6nzpPLPq8QJU9P6sef XI7na2mMHpK75FHl5fW/yVJfCXuBHmGgryfyEm+uUtvpLWpGceRBbRl4naJljbsf AVNSocBmPdWGL6PCdfcD5MID8iriIBfTYWLsAoBN1HcKKasSKr1BG+UxT3wGov7n STbQ7MLVQpDluS3kCgjbVNWUlouOcVhcNdOniC3GEDxzpT9ev7Tk/FilMNNu167N l28SaGUokLQnf/EuQfQmNJJyHpFIVsxeRs5ODQZDlvb10WHDFMtYCkXZDhrLJmm6 Ej+tFJiuMWfAIejzVkJ0gvZTvg5FzVknvEey9iNokzXnOsngIjaR4gS8KjUUH0k8 EF1348cJ3KwQxbkWifsEuVosDmiSFaF38j73IoYaHOQh06bVPm2gL/zGeGntDGQY X+RXL5XTJefiKps1jG4e96jYEUWIIlA/fodxkERKXcEmOsvT29v5gEAwcq6YGWXG McLGDbOpF/n9tuxihQQK =GgNP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----