You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
So therefore (last-stage? stage) further down stops progressing stages one stage too early OR if advanced elsewhere, fails to stop advancing stages when it actually reaches the last stage and busyloops next-stage!.
I guess the reason for this was so the stage argument to the next-stage-has-x? functions would be correct.. but I'd like to argue that if a function is called next-stage-x then the function is expected to do the stage argument adjustment itself, otherwise the next- prefix in the function name is not motivated..
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Here you set stage to one-less-than current stage:
kerbal/src/kerbal/core.clj
Line 124 in 282222e
So therefore
(last-stage? stage)
further down stops progressing stages one stage too early OR if advanced elsewhere, fails to stop advancing stages when it actually reaches the last stage and busyloopsnext-stage!
.I guess the reason for this was so the stage argument to the
next-stage-has-x?
functions would be correct.. but I'd like to argue that if a function is callednext-stage-x
then the function is expected to do the stage argument adjustment itself, otherwise thenext-
prefix in the function name is not motivated..The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: