On 05.03.2012 01:20, Andreas Vogel wrote:
Am 05.03.2012 01:03, schrieb Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko:
options? Any special reason?
2) Why do you refuse to allow short options for all of the menuentry
Because it shares the space with options to menuentry.
Don't understand what you mean. What is shared?
menuentry "title" hello {
echo $1; sleep 10
}
3) Wouldn't it be a good chance to use my patch which uses an anonymous
enum for indexing the options array?
No. Thinking like this is a slippery slope. Such patches may also
contain bugs (if you confuse 2 numbers).
Your patch could be committed into experimental but not trunk.
Life doesn't end at 2.00.
Nice joke.... that code right now is a slippery slope... with all those
obfuscated numbers. Just my 2 cents...
It may be unreadable and more difficult to maintain but neither matters
much for the release. Readability cleanup can be done after release
without problems.
If we start clean this and other files now, we'll spend too much time
and be generally counterproductive.
I understand that it may feel as if I'm having anything against you but
I don't, just releasing 2.00 is now a top priority and because of this
fixing bugs is important. Everything that is not to fix bugs or was
already announced at freeze as still accepted (all of which is now in)
is secondary now.
--
Regards
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
