Hi Steve, On 16 Mar 2013, at 23:00, steve donovan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Gary V. Vaughan <[email protected]> wrote: >> It would be really cool if Luarocks had some facility for virtual >> dependencies, >> so that, for example, both lyaml and luaYAML could satisfy a yaml dependency, > > It's indeed a useful concept, and time to think about how the next > rockspec version can support it. > > My understanding is that if you already have lyaml OR luaYAML then LR > is satisfied. If neither, then pick the first one?
Well, I would say that it's up to the rock that has the dependency to decide, because the APIs may not be identical - as is the case with the two yaml libs in my example. Otherwise we start to get into interface contracts and the like, which is a giant can of worms. Luarocks could just check that one or other (or both!) are available, and then the rock that said it depends on some yaml, gets to figure out which particular implementation was found, in order of most favourite to least favourite... WDYT? Cheers, -- Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT vaughan DOT pe) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
