On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Ulrich Mueller <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Brian Harring wrote: > >>> > from diffball (under current EAPIs) >>> >>> > """ >>> > RDEPEND=">=sys-libs/zlib-1.1.4 >>> > >=app-arch/bzip2-1.0.2 >>> > app-arch/xz-utils" >>> > DEPEND="${RDEPEND} >>> > virtual/pkgconfig" >>> > """ >>> >>> > becomes the following under the proposal: >>> >>> > """ >>> > DEPENDENCIES=">=sys-libs/zlib-1.1.4 >>> > >=app-arch/bzip2-1.0.2 >>> > app-arch/xz-utils" >>> > dep:build? ( virtual/pkgconfig )" >>> > """ >>> >>> Which is longer than the original. ;-) > >> I see 5 lines in the first version, and 4 in the second. I also see >> either someone who counted wrong, or basing that statement purely on >> byte count (which is frankly arguing to argue on your part). > > Can we agree that both counting of lines and characters is silly? ;-) > My point was that the new syntax isn't significantly more compact than > the present one. In one case there is another variable assignment, > in the other case you need an additional "dep:build? ( > virtual/pkgconfig )" group. > > Readability is more important, and there I still don't buy the > argument that the new syntax is better, and that any gain would > outweigh the cost of changing. After all, the existing variables for > dependency specification won't disappear, so devs would have to > remember both.
I agree it is a con, but is it a blocker? I mean basically any change proposed requires know the old way, and the new way..that is how changes work... > > Ulrich >
