On Thursday 17 January 2013 14:44:14 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:35:12 -0500 James Cloos wrote: > > >>>>> "CM" == Ciaran McCreesh writes: > > CM> That's what's known as "doing it wrong". You should be querying > > CM> your package mangler for a list of categories, not doing an 'ls'. > > > > ls(1) isn't relevant. find(1) is. grep(1) is. There are others. > > > > Using the 'package managers' isn't very helpful. They generally do > > everything poorly. And usually **s*l*o*w*l*y**, if they compile at > > all. > > On the other hand, they do things correctly, which your approach > doesn't. > > > I can't even remember every time I've needed to use a regex, glob or > > other pattern match where the fact that the real categories had a dash > > made things easier and faster. > > But wrong. If you want wrong answers quickly, cat /dev/urandom.
and breaking people for no good reason is just that -- not a good reason. is code that makes this assumption kind of crappy ? yes. is this new proposal a compelling use case for breaking that (pretty common) assumption ? no. there's no real technical overhead to have new qt categories follow the existing practice. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
