Re: An attack on a mint
Chip Morningstar <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.e.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
"Dean Tribble" <[email protected]> wrote: >I would think it would be better to explicitly articulate the >different case, even though it costs a conditional, as in: > > int take(final PurseX src) { > REQUIRE(dead); > REQUIRE(src); > if (src == this) { > // no-op deposit for self > return 0; > } else { > final int r = src.balance; > // for fail-safe, always reduce value or authority first > src.balance = 0; > balance += r; > return r; > } > } Am I the only one who notes the irony of *Dean* attacking this via the use of EQ? Chip