On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 04:28:49PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0029.html > > We need to decide upon a solution to the -flags problem. The proposed > solutions are: > > 1) Disallow all negatives. Disadvantages: we don't tend to disallow > things just because users could shoot themselves in the foot with them. > > 2) Allow negatives, and document how to use them correctly. > Disadvantages: sooner or later, some developer isn't going to read the > docs, and will really really screw things up with a misunderstanding. > ... > > 5) Use some weird tristate notation. Disadvantages: not everyone has the > slightest clue what set theory is.
'some weird tristate notation' must be what I proposed previously. =) I'm still convinced that the use of it would be easy, both for developers and for users, but I do acknowledge some (minor) issues like finding another usable character for the new notation. The last time I tried to explain my proposal, everybody except myself seemed to think it was complicated, so I will not try to promote it anymore, it's in the archives already. > I'm in favour of 2) personally, but others disagree. I'd like a proper > discussion on this before trying to get the GLEP through. What I am still missing is a good argument _FOR_ negatives. We are talking about negatives within groups, right? I agree with you that if we choose 2, sooner or later it's going to get screwed up. We must have a better reason for allowing them than just the off chance that negatives might be useful in a way we cannot forsee yet. If there is such a reason, I'd also pick 2. Maurice. -- Maurice van der Pot Gentoo Linux Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org Creator of BiteMe! [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kfk4ever.com
pgpCQ3x7cAqO7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
