sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items
List archive
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Generalized Depends (WAS: Version Dependancy)
- From: Robin Cook <rcook AT wyrms.net>
- To: Dufflebunk <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>
- Cc: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>, Grimoire <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] Generalized Depends (WAS: Version Dependancy)
- Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 04:25:08 -0000
There is a need for an optional_(whatever you want to call it) from the
provides. It would make some spells cleaner/easier if there was such an
option just as optional_depends makes a it a lot easier and cleaner.
CuZnDragon
Robin Cook
On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 16:33, Dufflebunk wrote:
> My objection is that optional_requires is an oxymoron.
> There is a potential problem with generalising depends to merge requires
> with depends. A requires lookup is much more expensive operation. Not a
> big deal, just look for the spell first, then a provides. There is
> another problem of name collisions between spells and provides. Again,
> not very serious, I think there have been no cases of that yet.
>
> We could extend the spell indexing to also create a provides index which
> would speed the checking up. It would be updated when 'gaze reindex' is
> run and would slow down the reindexing (and thus the end of an update) a
> little, probably not more than a couple of seconds though, I'm not sure.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 18:13, Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 03:10:17PM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> > > Jason Flatt said:
> > > > I think that implementing optional_requires is far more useful than
> > > > versioning. There. I said it. Happy? :^)
> > >
> > > I am very much agreed. Is optional_requires hard to implement?
> > > Shouldn't
> > > it be relatively easy; just use optional_depends (I'm not a bash hacker,
> > > so my opinion is uneducated)?
> >
> > While we're on that issue, shouldn't we just drop the difference between
> > depends and requires? Just replace everything by depends and
> > optional_depends and have sorcery look for a provides when the
> > dependency isn't known as a spell.
> >
> > Another thing about requires/provides, how about having a file
> > /var/state/sorcery/provides that lists all spells that 'provide'
> > something with the services they provide? With new entries added when a
> > spell with provides is installed. That would make using provides much
> > faster than it is now (takes quite some time to search all grimoires for
> > a specific required service).
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Grimoire mailing list
> SM-Grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-grimoire
>
-
[SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Dufflebunk, 06/21/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy, Casey Harkins, 06/22/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Robin Cook, 06/22/2003
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery] Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Dufflebunk, 06/23/2003
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery] Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Jason Flatt, 06/23/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Eric Sandall, 06/23/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/23/2003
-
[SM-Grimoire] Generalized Depends (WAS: Version Dependancy),
Dufflebunk, 06/23/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Generalized Depends (WAS: Version Dependancy), Robin Cook, 06/24/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy, Martin Ruderer, 06/24/2003
-
[SM-Grimoire] Generalized Depends (WAS: Version Dependancy),
Dufflebunk, 06/23/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/23/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Eric Sandall, 06/23/2003
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery] Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Jason Flatt, 06/23/2003
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery] Re: [SM-Grimoire] Version Dependancy,
Dufflebunk, 06/23/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.