Hi Duy,

On Mon, 22 Aug 2016, Duy Nguyen wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Matthieu Moy
> <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
> >>> I think the syntax should be design to allow arbitrary boolean
> >>> expression later if needed.
> >>
> >> I would be against that. We may extend it more in future, but it
> >> should be under control, not full boolean expressions.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > I'm not saying we absolutely need it, but if we allow several kinds of
> > conditions (gitdir-is:... and others in the future), then it's natural
> > to allow combining them, and arbitrary boolean expression is both simple
> > and powerful (operators and/or/not and parenthesis and you have
> > everything you'll ever need).
> For starter, we don't want another debate "python vs ruby vs lua vs
> ..." as the scripting language :) (for the record I vote Scheme! maybe
> with infix syntax)

FWIW I do not think that Matthieu implied that this has to be implemented.
But it does not make sense to slam the door shut prematurely, either.

Meaning: the more doors you can keep open with the new syntax, the better.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to