X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=IqjbzJzg c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=5fc71cb7
 a=+cj0cO56Fp8x7EdhTra87A==:117 a=XUQUfR6jMV9lBqHQHecx8A==:17
 a=9+rZDBEiDlHhcck0kWbJtElFXBc=:19 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=zTNgK-yGK50A:10
 a=a1KZgU7cAAAA:8 a=Mj1Xp5F7AAAA:8 a=5Ie-UG9EashyNH52dUYA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
 a=ng0hpkU2jXKPaRTLMVYJ:22 a=OCttjWrK5_uSHO_3Hkg-:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] SAB processing patches
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <e4ff3c96-939b-a93e-a32f-5e938b6daa63 AT epilitimus DOT com>
 <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2011302045040 DOT 2894 AT nimbus>
 <20201130220505 DOT 0AE4282C54FD AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
 <7c75ed03-456c-b408-8b50-0448f6b3a04f AT epilitimus DOT com>
 <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2012011606400 DOT 6785 AT nimbus>
 <1b2c64b3-6a36-c1f3-dd54-bb583c6bea17 AT epilitimus DOT com>
From: "Glenn (glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Message-ID: <82ed8e4a-50b3-9b5a-fac1-91708bdb9da7@epilitimus.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 20:48:47 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1b2c64b3-6a36-c1f3-dd54-bb583c6bea17@epilitimus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - delorie.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - epilitimus.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net: authenticated_id: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
X-Authenticated-Sender: a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
X-Source: 
X-Source-Args: 
X-Source-Dir: 
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfK9eNX4an12M5DolJyh8fsEVpK1vJP/O28IsjMqE0t4CNK3pwlIOVfCHyAwhl8DMsn9MvFU0YDWPWzkMUoea6BGHi5efbhm563jAoKl0y3cSaPW0hZSF
 tCC/Txi0feQ1QUTAugvto3CXjE9CYi7wo3A5Gb2PHvkY6vwTECEaxQsgGcbtn/NkD7+YnsX4v+kiePQeO8xkpBnF0aR0m+alKUp9QovqErA9xrKWGix/pvD8
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

Glenn (glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>
>> - Since you use the tuple (order, action, parms) in multiple places, it
>>   may be worth defining a collections.namedtuple for that purpose.
>>
> I'll look at it
Yeah, good idea.
>
>> - Don't use something like 1000000000 as a special value.  If you have
>>   to store the absence of a value in-band, use something that cannot
>>   ever occur as a valid value, like -1 or None.  (And if you *really*
>>   have to use a magic value somewhere, please define it as a constant.)
>>
> Here there was actually a reason to do it this way. By assigning a large
> positive number as the *default* order number, when I sorted them all
> the unordered actions end up at the end of the list naturally. But I can
> certainly make it a constant. The alternative was to have two lists, the
> ordered actions and the unordered ones which I really don't like.
After further review, add_refdes can be rewritten to use a nonnumeric
for the sorting. On the todo list.

Glenn