------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=167 --- Comment #17 from Phil Pennock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-16 00:20:09 --- (In reply to comment #16) > What do you think of wrapping the generic condition in bare braces, i.e. > eliminating the bool keyword? So the following would be roughly equivalent... For myself, I like the proposed syntax (first two cases, but see below). But for explaining it, time after time, to those people who visit exim-users and refuse to read documentation, I'm not so sure. I'm also not so sure that bool should be eliminated, as opposed to made an implicit default -- some people will prefer to see the explicit bool in their configs and I'm, in some cases, one of those people: I like stuff to be cleanly self-documenting and will happily do things like, in Perl, use the 'scalar' keyword explicitly, even in clearly scalar context. I think this is somewhat the same. Doesn't mean that I'll force this on others, just that I don't think bool{} should disappear entirely. Going from memory, it should be fairly simple to code as a check in the ECOND_* area, if the next character is a { then implicitly bool. However, > ${if and{{ $acl_m_foo }{ $acl_m_bar }} } The basic proposal would require: ${if and {{ {$acl_m_foo} }{ {$acl_m_bar} }} } to have the extra bare braces. To accept your syntax here, wouldn't each of the possible boolean values need to become an ECOND_* token? Or just handled explicitly, same as for a bare "{"? I'm not so sure I like where that's going. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
