| 1 |
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:56:56 +0200 |
| 2 |
Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Many eclasses (eutils being the most prominent example) contain: |
| 4 |
> DESCRIPTION="Based on the ${ECLASS} eclass" |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Is this of any use? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The reason that sort of thing is there is because in the olden days |
| 9 |
before we had specs or EAPIs or anything like that, eclasses were |
| 10 |
originally designed and implemented as "classes" in an OO type manner. |
| 11 |
The idea was that there would be a "base" eclass, and then you'd derive |
| 12 |
"kde", "gnome" etc eclasses from there, all in a nice hierarchy, and |
| 13 |
you'd be expected to "override" variables like DESCRIPTION as you go |
| 14 |
down the tree. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
As it turns out, eclasses ended up being used in a completely different |
| 17 |
way. But you still see bits of the original idea cropping up, such as |
| 18 |
in the words "class" and "inherit" and "base". |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives