[Scons-dev] Question about SCons CSIG behavior

[anatoly techtonik]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 8:02 PM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Team,
>
> I noticed something peculiar when examining how CSIG's are generated for
> Nodes.  In the case that get_content returns an error (IE. file is
> missing), then the signature becomes MD5( '' ).
>
> This seems a bit counter-intuitive.  Would it make more sense for
> get_csig() to return None until the node can actually be evaluated because
> otherwise a missing file has the same signature as an empty file, and those
> are two very different things.
>

It depends on usage scenario. For identification purposes it is better to
use prefixes that will reflect additional Node statuses. This will make it
more generic than just missing file check. The question if it is really
what is needed?
-- 
anatoly t.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20150816/be6945a8/attachment.html>