On Sunday June 05 2016 17:00:17 Gustaf Neumann wrote:
> i was talking about a general mechanism, through which a port maintainer
> can change the behavior of commands on which others depend. I do not see
> much danger with extending the platform command as discussed.
Of course. I wasn't thinkin
understanding of the
consequences of such changes to other ports. This would make maintenance
even more difficult.
What effect could the addition of an "else" condition to the platform statement
have on other ports, whether it's provided through a PortGroup (or similar) or through
base
nces of such changes to other ports. This would make maintenance
>even more difficult.
What effect could the addition of an "else" condition to the platform statement
have on other ports, whether it's provided through a PortGroup (or similar) or
through base? If it's done thro
Am 05.06.16 um 12:14 schrieb René J.V. Bertin:
On Saturday June 04 2016 13:41:59 Gustaf Neumann wrote:
yes, the {$len == 1} check needs to be generalized (was wrong in the
earlier versions as well).
If you mean in the other procedures:
no, i was referring with "earlier version" to the posted
On Saturday June 04 2016 13:41:59 Gustaf Neumann wrote:
>yes, the {$len == 1} check needs to be generalized (was wrong in the
>earlier versions as well).
If you mean in the other procedures: will you file an enhancement/submission
trac ticket to "base" that takes care of that, or do I file one
Gustaf Neumann wrote:
> The original code used as signature "proc platform {args} ..." and
> pulled later the "os" out of $args, whereas the posted one uses "proc
> platform {os args}",
Ah, right. Missed that :-/
> called, then the variant with "$consumed == 3" will call the uplevel,
Why? "Do
Am 04.06.16 um 10:08 schrieb René J. V. Bertin:
if {$len < 1} {
My code has 2 here, and I think that's reasonable ("platform darwin" on its own
doesn't make a lot of sense).
The original code used as signature "proc platform {args} ..." and
pulled later the "os" out of $args, whereas the
Gustaf Neumann wrote:
> The code below is more in line with current tcl code practice
Seems to work too
> (untested, using e.g. tcl index expressions).
after correcting a few omissions ;)
> if {$len < 1} {
My code has 2 here, and I think that's reasonable ("platform darwin" on its own
d
Am 03.06.16 um 14:55 schrieb René J. V. Bertin:
Rainer Müller wrote:
The definition of the platform proc is here:
https://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/port1.0/portutil.tcl?rev=149111#L765
Extending that syntax with an optional code block after an "else"
keyword would be possible
Rainer Müller wrote:
> The definition of the platform proc is here:
>
>
https://trac.macports.org/browser/trunk/base/src/port1.0/portutil.tcl?rev=149111#L765
>
> Extending that syntax with an optional code block after an "else"
> keyword would be possible.
Once I knew it was possible it wasn't
On Tuesday May 31 2016 09:31:02 Brandon Allbery wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:24 AM, René J.V. wrote:
> Is there some reason you can't invert the logic?
I don't see how, not if you have things to be done on one platform and other
things to be done on another. That's why I used if/else cons
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:24 AM, René J.V. wrote:
> That's a pity. I had quite a few if {${os.platform} eq "darwin"} {} else
> {} statements in certain of my ports, which I most all replaced with
> platform statements at the suggestion to do so.
Is there some reason you can't invert the logic?
On 2016-05-31 10:24, René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> Would it be hard (and potentially acceptable) to extend the syntax to
>
> platform ... {
> } else {
> }
>
> of something of the sort? That seems like it might require patching the Tcl
> source code.
The definition of the platform proc is here:
htt
On Sunday May 29 2016 10:14:53 Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>Correct, you can't use a platform statement to do that, so use an if
>statement.
That's a pity. I had quite a few if {${os.platform} eq "darwin"} {} else {}
statements in certain of my ports, which I most
variant" has not been correct for
several years. The platform statement used to behave like the variant statement
(creating a block of code that executes after the rest of the portfile) but now
behaves like an if statement (executing the code immediately where it appears
in the portfile).
Hi,
The documentation states that the platform{} syntax for specifying platform
variants doesn't allow you to specify a range of platforms. That still seems to
be accurate.
So there is no way to use a single platform statement to replace `if
{${os.platform} ne "darwin"}` (I
16 matches
Mail list logo
