Le 31 ao�t 04, � 08:33, Carsten Ziegeler a �crit :

David Crossley wrote:

+1 for the ability to return for subsequent processing.
I like the explicit name "return-no-match".
The default should ideally be true, but does that sit okay
with back-compatibility?

No :) The default should be "false".

+1, the current behaviour should be the default

I'm not a native speaker (obviously) and don't want to be *too* picky,
but "return-no-match" sounds a little bit wrong to me.
I think something like "return-on-no-match" or so would
be better, no?

Agreed, or even "continue-if-no-match".

A bit verbose, but Nicola says in his proposal "...make it possible for mounts not to necessarily halt processing if no match is found" which translates in my (simple ;-) mind to "optionally continue processing if no match is found".

But it's so hard to agree on names, whoever does the implementation gets to decide ;-)

-Bertrand



Reply via email to