On 2012-06-29 23:27, jcbollinger wrote:
On Friday, June 29, 2012 9:56:04 AM UTC-5, David Schmitt wrote:
Indeed! Even more so as using the word "declare" for "include" is a
load
of utter bollocks. "Declare" in the common programming language sense
means "indicating the existence of a thing that is defined elsewhere."
Like "declaring an external variable" or "(pre-)declaring a method",
and
never indicates actions taken.
You have a point there, but perhaps not the one you think you do.
Puppet's DSL is not a programming language, so applying linguistic
conventions associated with programming languages is not entirely fair.
Inasmuch as the DSL is a declarative language, in fact, more or less
/everything/ is a declaration, or part of one. Thus the problem with the
term "class declaration" is not that it's inaccurate (it's a declarative
statement that the target node has / belongs to the named class), but
rather that it's too generic when everything else is a declaration too.
English is only my second language, but I still see the difference
between "declare a class" and "declare *membership* in a class". A
subtle difference that is violated thoroughly in the style guide.
I used to prefer the term "include", but that doesn't fit well because
it also has to cover the "require" function and the parametrized-class
syntax. I eventually gave in to what seems to be the prevailing
terminology, at least on this group. If you have an alternative that is
better suited then I'm all ears. Maybe we can start a trend with it :-)
Includes, depends on, requires, delegates to, requests, inherits from,
pulls in, activates, requests, hauls in.
Hope dies last, as they say ;-)
Best Regards, David
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet
Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
