I don’t really understand the rationale for having separate alias types, e.g. R, C, O, M

Why not just have a single alias type and merge in whatever it contains? What’s the use case for separating them?

@cfleming I find it useful to have a :test alias that includes test dependencies and :main-opts, which I can optionally enable to actually run the tests.

you may have heard that Rich likes taking things apart

@kenny But if you had a single alias for that that would work anyway.

The dependencies would get used when calculation the classpath, and :main-opts would get picked up when running.

You don’t need the concept of separation for that.

> you may have heard that Rich likes taking things apart Sure, but I hope he also has reasons for that. I haven’t seen any for this particular case, which is why I asked.

the idea is that they can be used for different parts of the lifecycle and you can choose which part you’re affecting. Or you could say R,C,O,M are the simple part and A is the easy part

But surely the different parts of the lifecycle will just get picked up as needed anyway?

In Kenny’s test example, the :main-opts will just get ignored when building a classpath.

It seems like you’d only use that when you want to remove specific fields when applying an alias, and I can’t imagine a case where that would be useful.

building a classpath involves both the R and C parts

this is not a part of the design that I feel strongly about and I’m not going to give you an impassioned defense for it

as you know, sometimes decisions that seem important early seem less so later

Ok, thanks.

fwiw, I only use A these days

Yeah, that’s what I would do too. I’m mostly wondering how much support I should be adding for this to Cursive, or if I should just assume everything is implicitly A

I think I’ll do that until someone complains about it.

I think that would get you far