On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 03:15:15PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: > On 08/30/05 Brian Harring wrote: > Problem is that you then rely on python always evaluating "somestring" > > 0 as True which I don't think is a good idea (it holds true even for "0" > > 0), if you treat 0 as a string you get problems (as some strings are > > "smaller" than 0) and you can't convert all strings to ints.
In the initial proposal of EAPI, it was intended as version ebuild format #; think format specifications. Float is probably better, but strings being slipped in I don't see any good reason to allow, nor has it been requrested (it was specifically ixnayed when the idea was hashed out actually). Aside from that, again, stable is capable of a single eapi version; if it's a string, the code catches the value error and knocks it down to eapi0 due to the reasons described above. Further reason why string is a no go indicated in the code; if eapi0 portage tries regening an eapi1 cache entry, it stores negated eapi version with no other metadata. Allowing strings nukes that approach, unless you disallow - as the first character (which would be demonstration of strings not being incredibly well suited for eapi settings imo). > What's the point of using > anyway? Simplicity in the code right now, since stable will *never* support anything but eapi0. It's an easy check. ~harring
pgpqwMWMA9j4f.pgp
Description: PGP signature
