> On 10 Jan 2017, at 02:30, Robert Varga <n...@hq.sk> wrote: > > On 01/09/2017 11:32 PM, Andy Bierman wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Alex Campbell >> <alex.campb...@aviatnet.com <mailto:alex.campb...@aviatnet.com>> wrote: >> >> I don't see how a "when" statement modified by a deviation is any >> more complicated to implement than a "when" statement outside of a >> deviation - presuming that augments and deviations are processed >> before "when" statements. >> >> >> >> augments and deviations are processed once when the module is loaded. >> A when-stmt is processed anytime the value of the XPath boolean result >> changes. > > Right, but that also means that processing a 'deviate add { when ... }' > would occur only once, after which the cost would be the same as if that > when statement was present in the original definition.
I agree. > > In any case, the same effect can be achieved by deviate-adding an > appropriate must statement -- which seems appropriate, as presumably you > want to restrict the leaf from becoming 'true' rather than enforce it > not being available at all. Yes, except that a "when" constraint is stronger - it has to be satisfied in all trees whereas "must" only in a valid tree (sec. 8.1 of RFC 7950). Lada > > Regards, > Robert > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
