On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 12:31 -0700, Philip Kime wrote: > I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing - the REST syntax for CF > editing is nice and simple for scripting - the curly brackets would make > things more complicated to parse and generally use. When I was deciding > on a format for displaying CFs for the AT REST code, I automatically > chose "CF_" (changed to "CF-" now to match RT 3.6.0) because it's easy > to parse in the REST code and easy to edit in the CLI. All that shell > escaping for curly brackets when you're scripting would make the REST > interface less convenient to use ...
What if the CLI supported both versions of the syntax? Would that make the REST code more difficult to maintain? I agree that the lack of curly brackets makes scripting cleaner but I spend a few hours hitting my head against the wall to discover that difference (in the beginning). Maybe this should be moved to the -devel list. -- Joshua Colson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com We're hiring! Come hack Perl for Best Practical: http://bestpractical.com/about/jobs.html
