> it strikes me as being a latter day "Go To Statement Considered
> Harmful" sort of thing.

goto is harmful!

> I don't disagree as a general principal, but also admit to secretly
> using "set" to remove pre-existing communities from time to time, as
> we all probably do, even if we don't like to admit it in public.

i use 'set' very deliberately, and with no shame.  i expect(ed) it to
replace any existing communities.  it's akin to using = as contrasted
with +=.  i seemed a perfectly reasonable construct with clear and
useful semantics.  until we found out its semantics were not so clear
to some implementor(s).

am i supposed to replace
   set 666:42
   remove *:*
   add 666:42
like that's not gonna be error prone.  and please do not tell me that
the remove *:* leaves a few special well-known communities some
implementor thought should be special snowflakes.

randy, under-caffeinated and clearly grumpy

GROW mailing list

Reply via email to