From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1S5eGZ-0001zP-P1 for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:24:27 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51659) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5eGS-0001yA-I7 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:24:26 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5eG1-0002EL-Cf for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:24:20 -0500 Received: from mail-ey0-f169.google.com ([209.85.215.169]:34486) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S5eG1-0002DY-4N for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:23:53 -0500 Received: by eaal1 with SMTP id l1so168761eaa.0 for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:23:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7whebjWsyN7Gpnw1uNXueHIpIxgbynW+kGgKBOmBQ5A=; b=MQtE8JCEl/X05EWfzG314UgZ+1dzHQuhrij0DpdAGyqwFZ/MZ1/lW8c+pv87HgYuN5 QkJbaMaYMbw8c5g3E4crH5q9xMX4gIw+RQxm/N+m5adQIMG6YB3awtLQHQqsogoAdvkz bgaaEKsho/VyXlraIRRJ61gtRxr2avyHozYapnx7XyKM+BfK3aaJA6/OBfSnZLTj+GF3 1dSlfx4VWYOlkzSjc14PQuJs82bOzfUtNMvMee2kzBtTgBwBbKaxSeiRyozluiDVbPtE BN+punWfY6rye7dTTgrsfVrua2czKHS8b9wrCDqsSTJZSzsqfLshHapJ7Kr/LwACrWOd dwUQ== Received: by 10.213.26.71 with SMTP id d7mr1285410ebc.30.1331216631117; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:23:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from debian.x201.phnet (91-233.197-178.cust.bluewin.ch. [178.197.233.91]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o11sm6627129eef.4.2012.03.08.06.23.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 08 Mar 2012 06:23:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F58C0F2.8090404@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:23:46 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltaXIgJ8+GLWNvZGVyL3BoY29kZXInIFNlcmJpbmVua28=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20120216 Icedove/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andreas Vogel Subject: Re: Ideas for the future References: <4F541349.7070704@anvo-it.de> <4F541723.6030105@gmail.com> <4F54A094.1000000@anvo-it.de> In-Reply-To: <4F54A094.1000000@anvo-it.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.215.169 Cc: The development of GNU GRUB X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:24:26 -0000 On 05.03.2012 12:16, Andreas Vogel wrote: > if [ "feature" = unavail ] ; then > set hidden=1 > else > set hidden=0 > fi > menuentry "Boot memtest86" --hidden $hidden { ... } > > for looks nicer opposed to > > if [ "feature" = unavail ] ; then > set hidden="--hidden" > else > set hidden= > fi > menuentry "Boot memtest86" $hidden { ... } It's a question of personal preference and I personally prefer the second one. And even if behaviour of optional arguments is changed it doesn't mean that we should increase bitrot by having different interface conventions for some options. -- Regards Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko