I expect param => undef to be an explicit expression of 'param' not being
specified by the current declaration, or as an override, to express the
idea of the overridden resource as if 'param' had not been specified. The
latter is essential. The former follows for consistency, because
foobar { 'example':
param => undef
}
should not express a different resource state than does
Foobar['example'] {
param => undef
}
Moreover, my gut feeling is that having the undef bind to the actual
parameter instead of being declaration metasyntax implies a need for users
to have more knowledge of the details of the definition's (or class's)
implementation than is reasonable. Though users may indeed have such
information in some cases, that still doesn't sit well with me.
John
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/F0rGcYv_GAQJ.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
