On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]> wrote: > > My goal in designing the new config language is to have the ability that > things do not necessarily be defined upfront. Thus I insisted on the > capability to declare actions *right* inside the rule. The idea is that we > often have situation (very often indeed) that an action is used only once. I > find it somewhat unintuitive (and error-prone) when one needs to declare and > name the action first, just to use it one time. In that sense, I'd like to > have the capability to declare such objects in scope.
I see where you're coming from - and I do agree. That said, I think getting the difference visible is important. For example, if you want to use an action one-off, you shouldn't be permitted to name it. If you want to declare it for multiple reuse, it must be at a specific scope level (ie, global scope only), and it must be named. That said, no objections. :) -Aaron _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
