PANTS_* namespacing bike shed:
# development
e
PANTS_* namespacing bike shed:
๐Ÿ‘€ 4
We have a few boot up control knobs that use the global namespace today: + PANTS_SHA + PANTS_DEBUG + PANTS_BOOTSTRAP_TOOLS Fwict these were not invented with much thought towards "What if someone tried to write a subsystem named ...". I'd like to carve out a few more for the Pants installer / bootstrapper but be disciplined with a namespace to house them under. So, maybe `PANTS_INSTALLER_*`*.* Bike shed is what name to pick? Also could be
PANTS_SETUP_*
... etc. I don't really care about the colors. Does somebody care about the colors?
c
I like purple โค๏ธ
e
I will seriously just use that so watch out!
๐Ÿคฃ 1
I really really don't care the name, but I will be staking it.
I guess
PANTS_BOOTSTRAP
might be it, already claimed.
๐Ÿ‘ 1
c
I guess youโ€™ll be free of any future conflict with
PANTS_PURPLE_*
(also like
PANTS_SETUP_*
but donโ€™t have particular strong feelings for any)
e
That would do the least damage.
h
PANTS_INSTALLATION
or
PANTS_INSTALLER
make sense to me.
PANTS_SETUP
seems too vague, that e.g. GLOBAL options like
--pantsd
are related to the generic setup too
I like
PANTS_BOOTSTRAP
a lot
e
So, the name is not the thing to think about IMO its the likelihood of usefulness as a future subsystem that will be blocked,
๐Ÿ‘ 2
c
Oh, guess I introduced
PANTS_BOOTSTRAP_SCRIPT
even.. ๐Ÿ˜›
e
I like bootstrap - not foir the name - but for the fact its already claimed.
Ok, I think the damage done principle trumps all here, going with bootstrap.
๐Ÿ‘ 1
โž• 1
Thanks - I could've / should've reached that conclusion in my head - escaped me. Sorry for the noise. There was no choice here in the end!
c
Oh, I enjoy getting a peek into the process ๐Ÿ™‚
and got a good laugh out of the purple suggestion too ๐Ÿ˜‚
e
My process is self-contained in general. I'm usually good at arguing with myslf.
Today I failed. Got lazy.
c
Iโ€™ve been doing self-contained work so much for so long, I enjoy acting it out a bit, I suppose..
โž• 1
h
Or just prepend another underscore:
_PANTS_ANYTHING
will not collide with option names?
Or PANTS_BOOTSTRAP seems fine too
e
Well, yeah, the leading
_
doesn't work here because the new stuff actually includes a fast toml parser and can read env or toml; i.e. The scie-pants can actually be configured itself via
[bootstrap] ...