On 1/3/07 2:20 AM, "Philip Hazel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The "not totally logical, but does what a lot of people want" fix would > be to treat an empty string as "0". It's important, I think, to remember what we're doing. We're not designing Exim configuration syntax and semantics from scratch. If we were, we could argue about typed variables vs untyped and initialized vs uninitialized variables (as so many other venues do constantly) being "better" or "easier". What we have done is make a change which renders previously-working configurations--in large quantity--non-working. Philip has always tried to avoid doing that (except in revisions which change the integer part of the version number), and I think that was wise even though it has led to some awkward constructs. Therefore, I think the right solution, given where we are, is to make as many of the newly-broken configurations work again, even if people from some programming backgrounds--but not all--would not design the syntax and semantics that way working from scratch. It would seem that putting in Philip's suggested patch would be the way to achieve this. I regret that I did not see this coming when the original change was proposed--I don't think I use the now-failing constructs much if at all in our configurations, so I didn't notice the problem. --John -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
