Move in vs. satisfies to a note and mention special cases of in (#41727)
* Move in vs. satisfies to a note and mention special cases of in * Address feedback: oveoverlap -> intersect * Re-word the satisfies versus in note. --------- Co-authored-by: Massimiliano Culpo <massimiliano.culpo@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
7583cf20d8
commit
bf39900390
1 changed files with 10 additions and 4 deletions
|
@ -4379,10 +4379,16 @@ implementation was selected for this build:
|
||||||
elif "mvapich" in spec:
|
elif "mvapich" in spec:
|
||||||
configure_args.append("--with-mvapich")
|
configure_args.append("--with-mvapich")
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
It's also a bit more concise than satisfies. The difference between
|
It's also a bit more concise than satisfies.
|
||||||
the two functions is that ``satisfies()`` tests whether spec
|
|
||||||
constraints overlap at all, while ``in`` tests whether a spec or any
|
.. note::
|
||||||
of its dependencies satisfy the provided spec.
|
|
||||||
|
The ``satisfies()`` method tests whether this spec has, at least, all the constraints of the argument spec,
|
||||||
|
while ``in`` tests whether a spec or any of its dependencies satisfy the provided spec.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
If the provided spec is anonymous (e.g., ":1.2:", "+shared") or has the
|
||||||
|
same name as the spec being checked, then ``in`` works the same as
|
||||||
|
``satisfies()``; however, use of ``satisfies()`` is more intuitive.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||||
Architecture specifiers
|
Architecture specifiers
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue