Re: Backward incompatible CQL changes 0.8.0 -> 0.8.1

2011-07-24 Thread David Boxenhorn
Could we have a strict mode that would enforce quoting terms (this would be used in code) and a lax version that could be used in interactive mode, where backward compatibility is not so important? On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Eric Evans wrote: > On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 21:29 -0500, paul cann

Re: Backward incompatible CQL changes 0.8.0 -> 0.8.1

2011-07-24 Thread David Boxenhorn
I meant "lax mode" not "lax version". On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 11:33 AM, David Boxenhorn wrote: > Could we have a strict mode that would enforce quoting terms (this would be > used in code) and a lax version that could be used in interactive mode, > where backward compatibility is not so important

Re: Backward incompatible CQL changes 0.8.0 -> 0.8.1

2011-07-24 Thread Eric Evans
On Sun, 2011-07-24 at 11:33 +0300, David Boxenhorn wrote: > Could we have a strict mode that would enforce quoting terms (this would be > used in code) and a lax version that could be used in interactive mode, > where backward compatibility is not so important? It's possible, but the skeptic (cyni

Re: Backward incompatible CQL changes 0.8.0 -> 0.8.1

2011-07-24 Thread David Boxenhorn
It should be strict by default. People who write code are trained to be careful (or should be). Interactive environments can set it to lax, if they want, for their user base. On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Eric Evans wrote: > On Sun, 2011-07-24 at 11:33 +0300, David Boxenhorn wrote: > > Could