From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 3 May 2001 04:34:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 3 May 2001 04:34:22 -0400 Received: from mail.alphalink.com.au ([203.24.205.7]:11014 "EHLO mail.alphalink.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 3 May 2001 04:34:12 -0400 Message-ID: <3AF11A0D.FB206A2B@alphalink.com.au> Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 18:42:53 +1000 From: Greg Banks X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.1 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: esr@thyrsus.com CC: CML2 Subject: Re: [kbuild-devel] Why recovering from broken configs is too hard In-Reply-To: <20010503034755.A27693@thyrsus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Eric S. Raymond wrote: > I agree with the main thrust of your argument, but > It would be hard to know how to order your candidates to present > them to the user in a natural sequence -- and the problem of deciding > which variable to present for mutation by the user next, if you choose > that UI, equates to this. There is a natural order for presenting variables to the user, and that's the menu tree order. At least in the Linux kernel CML2 corpus the menus are roughly organised from most general to most specific options, so options appearing earlier in the tree are likely to appear in more constraints and you probably want to ask the user to mutate them later. Greg. -- If it's a choice between being a paranoid, hyper-suspicious global village idiot, or a gullible, mega-trusting sheep, I don't look good in mint sauce. - jd, slashdot, 11Feb2000.