On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 13:36:16 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> On nie, 2017-07-09 at 11:29 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > You don't seem to get how normalizing and constant
> > propagation/elimination works.
> >
> > Basically, reordering would be:
> > And(list) -> And( forced(list) + free(list) + ma
On nie, 2017-07-09 at 11:29 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> You don't seem to get how normalizing and constant
> propagation/elimination works.
>
> Basically, reordering would be:
> And(list) -> And( forced(list) + free(list) + masked(list) )
> Or(list) -> Or( ... . )
> etc.
>
> While normalizing
On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 23:56:07 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> On sob, 2017-07-08 at 22:34 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 20:44:24 +0200
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > > On sob, 2017-07-08 at 16:12 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:43:39 +0200
> >
On nie, 2017-07-09 at 10:29 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sun, 09 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On nie, 2017-07-09 at 09:22 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > Second, and more important, introduction of an automatic solver
> > > would inevitably lead to proliferation of REQUIRED_U
> On Sun, 09 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> On nie, 2017-07-09 at 09:22 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Second, and more important, introduction of an automatic solver
>> would inevitably lead to proliferation of REQUIRED_USE in the tree.
>> However, nothing would guarantee that the package m
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 15:47 -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 03:29 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On sob, 2017-07-08 at 15:21 -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> > > On 07/08/2017 02:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > Hi, everyone.
> > > >
> > > > I think the affairs have settled enough and
On nie, 2017-07-09 at 09:22 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Nobody said anything about the next EAPI. The GLEP doesn't say a
> > word about introducing it in a future EAPI.
> > We're adding this as an optional (default off) FEATURE into Portage
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> Nobody said anything about the next EAPI. The GLEP doesn't say a
> word about introducing it in a future EAPI.
> We're adding this as an optional (default off) FEATURE into Portage
> and we'll see how it works. As far as I'm concerned, we can enabl
On 07/08/2017 03:29 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On sob, 2017-07-08 at 15:21 -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>> On 07/08/2017 02:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Hi, everyone.
>>>
>>> I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling
>>> in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It'
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 15:21 -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 02:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hi, everyone.
> >
> > I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling
> > in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It's got all
> > the algorithms, rationale and se
On 07/08/2017 02:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi, everyone.
>
> I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling
> in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It's got all
> the algorithms, rationale and separated reference implementation.
>
> If there are no major concerns
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 23:56 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On sob, 2017-07-08 at 22:34 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > Unless I'm missing something, rationale seems more about cases rejected
> > by the restricted syntax. Numbers I'm talking about is the # of rejected
> > constraints vs accepted (and
On 07/08/2017 11:31 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Nobody said anything about the next EAPI. The GLEP doesn't say a word
> about introducing it in a future EAPI.
>
> We're adding this as an optional (default off) FEATURE into Portage
> and we'll see how it works. As far as I'm concerned, we can enable
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 22:34 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 20:44:24 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > On sob, 2017-07-08 at 16:12 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:43:39 +0200
> > > Michał Górny wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi, everyone.
> > > >
> > > > I
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 20:58 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On sob, 2017-07-08 at 12:26 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > Section "Processing algorithm":
> > >
> > > > 2. Check whether the REQUIRED_USE constraint matches restrictions
> > > > s
On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 20:44:24 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> On sob, 2017-07-08 at 16:12 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:43:39 +0200
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, everyone.
> > >
> > > I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling
> > > in the
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 21:05:57 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:39:29 +0200
> > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> >> Indeed, makes sense. Would it also make sense to have some more
> >> logical meaning in a future EAPI ? I mean, i
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:39:29 +0200
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> Indeed, makes sense. Would it also make sense to have some more
>> logical meaning in a future EAPI ? I mean, in every context I've ever
>> seen, applying a rule to the empty set is the
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> On sob, 2017-07-08 at 12:26 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Section "Processing algorithm":
>>
>> > 2. Check whether the REQUIRED_USE constraint matches restrictions
>> > set in #Restrictions on REQUIRED_USE format. If it does not, report
>> > a RE
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 16:12 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:43:39 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > Hi, everyone.
> >
> > I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling
> > in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It's got all
> > the algorithms,
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 12:26 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> > The pre-GLEP for review is here:
> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:ReqUse
>
> On first glance:
>
> Section "Processing algorithm":
>
> > 2. Check whether the REQUIRED
On sob, 2017-07-08 at 18:58 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:39:29 +0200
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > As much as I hate the weird || ( use ? ( ) ) and empty block rules,
> > > it would be worse to have them apply in some situations but not
> > > others.
> >
> > Indeed, mak
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:39:29 +0200
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > As much as I hate the weird || ( use ? ( ) ) and empty block rules,
> > it would be worse to have them apply in some situations but not
> > others.
>
> Indeed, makes sense. Would it also make sense to have some more
> logical meaning i
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 15:23:39 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:14:09 +0200
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:01:39 +0100
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:49:56 +0200
> > > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:26:59 +0
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:14:09 +0200
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:01:39 +0100
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:49:56 +0200
> > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:26:59 +0200
> > > Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > | * An any-of group (||) evaluat
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:01:39 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:49:56 +0200
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:26:59 +0200
> > Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > | * An any-of group (||) evaluates to true if at least one of the
> > > | items in it evaluates to true.
>
On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:43:39 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi, everyone.
>
> I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling
> in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It's got all
> the algorithms, rationale and separated reference implementation.
>
> If there are no ma
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:49:56 +0200
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:26:59 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > | * An any-of group (||) evaluates to true if at least one of the
> > | items in it evaluates to true.
> > | * An exactly-one-of group (^^) evaluates to true if exactly one of
>
On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:26:59 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> | * An any-of group (||) evaluates to true if at least one of the
> | items in it evaluates to true.
> | * An exactly-one-of group (^^) evaluates to true if exactly one of
> | the items in it evaluates to true, and all the remaining items
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> The pre-GLEP for review is here:
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:ReqUse
On first glance:
Section "Processing algorithm":
| 2. Check whether the REQUIRED_USE constraint matches restrictions
| set in #Restrictions on REQUIRED_USE f
Hi, everyone.
I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling
in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It's got all
the algorithms, rationale and separated reference implementation.
If there are no major concerns raised, I will soon start working
on writing an optimized
31 matches
Mail list logo
