charm: url Collection is pointless

https://code.launchpad.net/~niemeyer/juju/url-collection-is-pointless/+merge/92175

(do not edit description out of merge proposal)

[niemeyer, 2012-02-09 00:57:47]

Please take a look.

[niemeyer, 2012-02-10 13:04:00]

On 2012/02/09 00:57:47, niemeyer wrote:
> Please take a look.

Reviews please?

[fwereade, 2012-02-10 13:36:57]

LGTM

https://codereview.appspot.com/5639065/diff/1/charm/url.go
File charm/url.go (left):

https://codereview.appspot.com/5639065/diff/1/charm/url.go#oldcode17
charm/url.go:17: type URL struct {
Total bikeshedding: might be nice to have the fields in the order they appear in
a url string.

[rog, 2012-02-10 15:26:07]

LGTM

https://codereview.appspot.com/5639065/diff/1/charm/url.go
File charm/url.go (left):

https://codereview.appspot.com/5639065/diff/1/charm/url.go#oldcode17
charm/url.go:17: type URL struct {
On 2012/02/10 13:36:58, fwereade wrote:
> Total bikeshedding: might be nice to have the fields in the order they appear
in
> a url string.

+1 on that colour.
given that you use untagged struct initialisers in the test, it would make those
look more obvious too.

[niemeyer, 2012-02-10 17:15:36]

https://codereview.appspot.com/5639065/diff/1/charm/url.go
File charm/url.go (left):

https://codereview.appspot.com/5639065/diff/1/charm/url.go#oldcode17
charm/url.go:17: type URL struct {
On 2012/02/10 13:36:58, fwereade wrote:
> Total bikeshedding: might be nice to have the fields in the order they appear
in
> a url string.

Good idea.

[niemeyer, 2012-02-10 17:19:16]

*** Submitted:

charm: url Collection is pointless

R=fwereade, rog
CC=
https://codereview.appspot.com/5639065