Well that is difficult isn't it? Perhaps what I suggested a long time back in my bug is best and allow regexp:
@agent blah and (matches-version: /someRegExp/) example to match 6.x through 7.x: @agent ie and (matches-version: /[67](\.\d)*/) yeah it is harder to write, but then we can write it once and it handles pretty much all use cases. The other twist is to give the code entire user agent string: @agent matches(/MSIE\s+[67]/) This really gives the user all the control they need and it is pretty easy to parse without having to code many syntax improvements over time as new requirements come up. -Andrew On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Andy Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:21 PM, Andrew Robinson > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'll be happy either way, but I think I now bend to the below > > explanation of 5 == 5.0 from Jeanne's reasoning > > FWIW, I actually agree with Jeanne's first opinion. :-) > > That is, I think of "5" as "5.*". "5.0" as "5.0.*", etc. > > Regarding the use of floating points to represent versions... I was > wondering whether we should avoid this since it would prevents us from > supporting "major.minor.reallyminor" version strings. I don't know > that we will ever need to go further than major.minor, though the > Gecko versions use the third digit, so perhaps we should pick a > solution that doesn't preclude us from supporting this? > > (BTW, sorry all about my little digression earlier on the thread...) > > Andy >
