| 1 |
On Friday 03 December 2004 5:19 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 23:32 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Heh.. It'd take about 2 minutes to write and test the 3 lines of code to |
| 4 |
> > implement said enhancement. The question is, is this the correct |
| 5 |
> > enhancement. If so, why? I'd be more inclined to use a file to define a |
| 6 |
> > profile as being "valid" rather than "invalid". |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> That's kinda like defining a profile as "non-deprecated" rather than |
| 9 |
> "deprecated." To me, it doesn't make sense to say when something works |
| 10 |
> properly -- that should be expected. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
A better comparison would be like defining them as "completed" instead of |
| 13 |
"incomplete". |
| 14 |
If a valid-marker is used, it can (and probably should) be inherited. If an |
| 15 |
invalid-marker is used, you almost *never* want to inherit it. |
| 16 |
Alternatively, it would be possible to mark profiles as either valid or |
| 17 |
invalid and inherit the value from parents. |
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Luke-Jr |
| 20 |
Developer, Utopios |
| 21 |
http://utopios.org/ |
Archives