1 |
>>>>> On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
>> Shouldn't the spec guarantee that it's the empty string (i.e., not |
4 |
>> a string containing arbitrary whitespace) if the list is empty? |
5 |
>> Otherwise simple binary tests like [[ -n ${REPLACING_VERSIONS} ]] |
6 |
>> cannot be done. |
7 |
|
8 |
> We had an issue with this early on with Paludis: certain eclasses |
9 |
> were expecting exact spacing requirements inside A and AA based upon |
10 |
> a quirk in how Portage created them, and it was causing weird bugs. |
11 |
> I'd be inclined to say that people should write more tolerant |
12 |
> code... |
13 |
|
14 |
No, nothing like exact spacing requirements in the general case. Only |
15 |
simplify developers' lifes in what I guess will be 90% of the usage. |
16 |
|
17 |
And I think that one could already read "space separated" in that way: |
18 |
If there are no elements, there is nothing to separate. |
19 |
|
20 |
Ulrich |