On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 2:35 AM, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A problem with this approach is that there's no way to reset a generic > flag to the default behaviour. If +bbb is set there is no way to reset > "aaa" to selecting from the full "bbb ccc ddd" group. Currently just > specifying -bbb resets that flag and "aaa" will return to default > behaviour but with "my" implementation specifying -bbb will remove > "bbb" from the selection group. > A solution to this would be that specifying +aaa in any level would > reset the "aaa" behavioiur and would quench any specific flags set in > earlier levels. So having "+aaa +bbb +aaa" would give normal > behavioiur for "aaa". A problem with this solution is what will happen > if a specific flag is present in multiple generic flags (for example > the specific flag "qt3" is part of both "qt" and "gui" generic flags). > Say that we, in addition to the above generic set, have "iii: bbb jjj > kkk", what will be the effect of "+foo -bbb +iii"? Will +foo set +ccc > (as "bbb" is removed from the selection) and +iii set +bbb (as +iii > was specified after "bbb" was removed with -bbb)? The result thus > being "+ccc +bbb", which means that from the "aaa" selection set two > flags will be set and is this a problem? A solution to this is to not > allow specific flags to be present in multiple generic flags. > > Hope to get some input on this and in the end come to a consensus. >
It seems the two states of set and unset aren't enough. How does adding a third state (on, off, neutral) affect things? > "aaa: bbb ccc ddd" Are bbb, ccc, ddd mutually exclusive? I don't think that is a reasonable assumption. Some apps can do runtime selection of the specific implementation. Others can't. -- Carlo J. Calica _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
