Re: [PATCH 2/2] kconfig: Print the value of each reverse dependency

[Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 06:31:48PM +0100, Ulf Magnusson wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 6:20 PM, Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Ulf,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 05:09:50AM +0100, Ulf Magnusson wrote:
> >> IMO, we could take this as is (after addressing other people's
> >> comments), since it's already a big improvement, and then add sorting
> >> later if we feel like it.
> >>
> >> Don't have to do everything at once. :)
> >
> > I agree that it's not possible to do everything perfect right from the
> > start. But since we are changing the user experience, I just thought
> > that we would first like to see how both implementations (prefixed
> > vs grouped tokens) look like, then make a decision (I'm still open
> > minded about it), then affect the users.
> 
> Isn't the latest patchset doing both? That seems like the best of both worlds.

Well, I call "prefixed tokens" solution [1] and "grouped tokens"
solution [2]. Assuming we share the same view, [1] has definitely less
of an impact on Kconfig (see [3]). That's the main argument to prefer it
over [2]. My personal choice is still [2]. However if it happens
that other reviewers prefer [1], I won't object on it.

[1] Selected by:
    - [y] EXPR_Y
    - [m] EXPR_M
    - [ ] EXPR_N

[2] Selected by [y]:
    - EXPR_Y
    Selected by [m]:
    - EXPR_M
    Selected by [n]:
    - EXPR_N

[3] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kbuild&m=151848343313335&w=4

> And yeah, I just get some personal restlessness when good stuff floats
> around for a long time without getting in. :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Ulf

Thanks,
Eugeniu.