[Exherbo-dev] Proposal for "option restrictions" syntax

Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccreesh at googlemail.com
Wed Aug 13 22:03:21 BST 2008


On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:49:17 +0200
Bernd Steinhauser <exherbo at bernd-steinhauser.de> wrote:
> > What are all the possible types of restriction we need to describe?
> > I can think of:
> > 
> > * if a then b
> > * if a then not b
> > * at least one of a b c
> > * exactly one of a b c
> > * at most one of a b c
> 
> I don't think, that there is more. At least not more that would make
> sense.
> 
> Regarding the syntax, for the third case, I guess the obvious
> solution would be
> || ( a b c )

I don't like that. Why don't we go with labels or annotations somehow?

Labels we're already going to use for suboptions, which is a shame
because

    one-of: foo bar baz

is quite nice. Possibly something like:

    ( foo bar baz ) [[ number-selected = exactly-one ]]
    ( monkey ) [[ requires = [ animals bananas ] ]]

which is a lot more user-understandable than horrid || / ^^ weirdness...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.exherbo.org/pipermail/exherbo-dev/attachments/20080813/4206f63c/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Exherbo-dev mailing list