You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It feels like it would generate more benefits than harms if we make read_pkglite() an exported function, because people might need to parse pkglite.txt directly sometimes. This would avoid the use of :::.
I think if we export read_pkglite(), it's reasonable to also create and export a new function write_pkglite() by decoupling the middle part from unpack(). This means that you can read it from the txt, work on the list, and write it back.
Update: oops, unpack() only writes to package structures so it's irrelevant. We only need to create the logic to write the list to txt. A typical user flow can be pack() -> read_pkglite() -> modify list or just get some data -> write_pkglite() or not -> unpack().
It feels like it would generate more benefits than harms if we make
read_pkglite()
an exported function, because people might need to parsepkglite.txt
directly sometimes. This would avoid the use of:::
.What do you think? @elong0527
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: