[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Updated Sieve environment draft posted

2008-03-15 11:32:49

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 09:37:12PM +0000, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
I am planning to implement both environment and variables at some point. 
But environment as written is just a couple of hours of work, while 
variables is more like a couple of weeks of work. So I would rather not 
tie environment to variables.

Except that I made no suggestion that they be tied, and I even said that
I liked the fact that the test(*) doesn't depend on variables.  What I
opined was that the draft could state what the behavior would be in the
presence of the variables extension -- analogous to how it already
states what the behavior is in the presence of the relational extension.
Not that it require variables.

I hadn't intended to follow up again, not having anything new to add,
but since two people commented on a perceived requirement to implement
variables according to my remarks, I figured I would.  To me, specifying
a variables namespace here adds utility and symmetry, which appeals to
me (although that's not always a complete justification for anything, I
fall on that side here), and won't require any later extension to do it,
which also appeals to me.  At any rate it's not a huge deal.


(*)tho I did say "verb" - it's a bad habit of mine, like nailbiting.