On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Ethan Quach<ethan.quach at sun.com> wrote: > Peter Tribble wrote: >> >> In particular, the definition given of a base manifest implies that >> you're expecting >> simple parameter substitution, with the derivation module presumably >> supplying >> the values of the substituted parameters. How much control does that give >> you >> in practice over the final manifest? > > No, I don't think we can simply provide derivation of > just values. For example, the choice of whether or not > to do mirroring of the target would require presence or > absence of a complete chunk of specification, not just > a value. So we will need to define derivation lines are, > but I was thinking this to come out in the design.
That's what I was getting at. The way I see the derived manifest is that the derivation module can include or exclude fairly large chunks. (The way I visualized it in my head - a pseudo implementation if you like - was to think in terms of the C preprocessor, with the derivation module working out what variables are defined.) -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
