in reply to Patches vs. 'new*' code

Mark dead code as dead. When you want to create some new thing to fiddle with, use one of the many dead code nodes. When you roll it into production, mark the node as dead again.

We shouldn't reuse node IDs. There are places that assume that node creation age is monotonic with node ID. It isn't like we've got so many defunct node IDs (even with the huge number of bogus scratchpads snafu) that reusing them will make much difference as to when node IDs won't fit in 4 bytes any more (and the DB can support larger node IDs than that).

If there are too many dead code nodes marked as dead (I tend to rename them and empty them so they are very obviously dead and also don't do anything), then nuke them (they aren't public nodes so nuking them *eventually* isn't a big problem for me).

- tye        

  • Comment on Re: Patches vs. 'new*' code (only temporary recycling)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Patches vs. 'new*' code (only temporary recycling)
by castaway (Parson) on Oct 09, 2004 at 11:43 UTC
    That sounds sensible.. I wonder if we could fudge the 'create node' link (Admin Nodelet), into picking a node of the requested type, that has a title of 'recycle', or something.. At least for code nodes, this shouldnt cause too much trouble. (Probably a more unique and unlikely-to-be-used name would need to be chosen).

    Also, to ease the usage, a button in the Admin nodelet (or pmdev nodelet?) could be provided to empty and 'recycle' a node, in the case of a pmdev button, it would just suggest the node for recycling, maybe. This should probably (somehow) check that the node isnt in use..

    Ideas, ideas..

    C.