On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Bruce Johnson<[email protected]> wrote: > Because it's easy to bikeshed: can we make the -soyc (-soycExtra) flag more > like -style in that it has multiple values rather than having two separate > flags? Or is there a rationale for this style that I'm missing. > When Bob V's permutation control changes land, we want to make all of this > sort of stuff fall into the category of deferred binding properties, so that > you could, for example, create one permutaiton with style PRETTY, another > with style DETAILED, etc. Having the -soyc flag follow a name/value pattern > would make it more amenable to this change.
There is no immediate use case for the detailed information. However, I hated to remove all that code when we might need it later. Thus, I left -soyc as the normal use case, and added -XsoycExtra for those use cases that might conceivably need it in the future. It's not a documented option, and it's not listed when you run the compiler with -help. How does that sound, Bruce and Kathrin (and anyone else interested)? It seems very helpful if "-soyc" is the only option users need to supply. There is even talk of having the -soyc option go ahead and run the dashboard generator, thus giving you final HTML output without needing to add the second step. On a related note, I agree with Kathrin that it's not precisely "detailed" or "extra" information that this flag gives you. It's different information, different enough that you can't compute one from the other. I named it "extra" in a hurry. Can anyone think of anything that would be less misleading? -Lex --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
