Andy, [...] > Absolutely. I haven't looked at the full context of that statement, but > there is likely something that is being guarded by the return value of > execute_prerun_command, but the guard isn't made clear by the structure of > the code. What the transformation does is to open it up to possible problems > later on. > > [snip] >> >> So the boolean operators don't have equivalent behavior to the flow >> control operators in a number of circumstances - how do we want to proceed >> with this? >> > > I think we can continue on the current course, *if* there is follow up to > fix those very strange expressions.
I am not entirely sure what you mean by the strange expressions here. The pull request does not have the kind of expressions that Adrien talks about. He is also pointing out that _if_ parenthesis is removed from the equivalent expression, it results in a syntax error. So there cant be a one to one replacement without adding a wrapping parenthesis. This is not the case in the pull request. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/CA%2BemFfzVKzhQv%2Bx1gZRZt-FX9jP1gx5HMUXdtRJcbGjoWgHe3w%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
