On Sep 22, 2012 8:25 PM, "Michał Górny" <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 20:11:48 +0300 > Alex Alexander <wi...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Sep 22, 2012 7:38 PM, "Michał Górny" <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > > emerge 'foo >= 1.1' 'bar < 1.0'? > > > emerge foo '>=' 1.1 bar '<' 1.0? > > > > How is the above easier to read than > > > > emerge >=foo-1.1 <bar-1.0 > > Did you even test it? That would create '=foo-1.1' and then fail trying > to read 'bar-1.0'. It's rather: > > emerge '>=foo-1.1' '<bar-1.0'
Yes, you are right, still much easier to read than your example tho. Testing things is limited to very important stuff atm, I only have an android phone and intermittent 3g available and ssh without a real kb is a pain :-) > > I think your example is working against you*.* > > > > The current syntax is much easier to read than the > > quote-and-whitespace-tracking horror of your example :-P > > It's no less quoting than in the current case. And it could be simply > extended to supporting quoting-less syntax, e.g.: > > emerge foo -gt 1.1 bar -lt 1.0 I still find whitespace inappropriate for this kind of things. You are trying to replace a single atom that instantly gives you all required information with a format that does not clearly separate atoms, IMHO anyway :-) Alex | wired
