new DSL form container :nested => <inner> #6120
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
9 tasks
rolandwalker
force-pushed
the
container_nested
branch
from
192e769 to
65cda12
Compare
rolandwalker
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 11, 2014
new DSL form container :nested => <inner>
This was referenced Sep 11, 2014
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Note: tests will probably not pass until #6118 is merged, and may conflict with that PR.
Like #6068, this is a new form intended for inclusion in DSL 1.0, but which was
overlooked during planning in #4688.
As with #6068, implementing
container :nestednow means we would not have thebenefit of the forward-compatibility transition code. However,
nested_containerisonly used in 38 Casks in the main repo, so that is unlikely to cause a problem in practice.
The gain is consolidating two stanzas:
container_typeandnested_containerare bothhandled by
container. For a first-time Cask author, that seems more logical and regular.We do lose the extensibility of
nested_container, since:nestedcan only take a singlevalue. However, it is unlikely that extensibility is needed, and there are workarounds.