On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 00:49:57 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 19:39:33 -0400 > "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt...@o-sinc.com> wrote: > > The two ways are not the same, and there is a reason sets exist in > > the first place. People seem to be over looking that fact. I did > > not add sets. They are not new. I am simply trying to expand their > > use. > > Sets exist because people keep saying "let's have sets!" without > agreeing on what sets actually are or how they are to be used. Do they need to agree? Isn't Gentoo about choice? Maybe your use of sets is different from mine. Is that not acceptable to have choice? > Sets remain half-baked because it turns out they don't make > consistent sense in different contexts when you give them a > non-superficial amount of thought. Much of the world is half baked, but we manage despite such. There is much to be said about over thinking over engineering something. Few if anything in life is perfect. Many of the things we depend on are far from perfect. C'est la vie. This must be a Gentoo thing. Sets have nothing to do with me. Seems they have been around since ~2009. Someone coded in support for them etc. Seems some find use for them, and others have objection. Having been around Gentoo for some time, and just now coming across sets. I find them quite useful! Just ran into one limitation of them. -- William L. Thomson Jr.
pgpgA_Jg_1aNe.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
