Re: backslashes in escape rules

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 7/5/08 2:11 PM, "John Mandereau" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 2008/07/05 11:33 -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>> IMO, it's much more difficult to make (and verify) a rule that covers all of
>> the changes for a version.  As we currently stand, if I make changes to the
>> syntax, all I have to do is write a simple rule to cover my changes.  If we
>> had only one rule per version, then I'd have to integrate my rule with
>> everybody else's rule.
>
> It's trivial to concatenate rules into a single function, and convert-ly
> applies rules sequentially anyway, so this is not a strong argument
> against merging; if necessary, we can make merged rules clearer with a
> comment for each rule in a conv function with multiple rules.

Doesn't each rule have a "version, change made" structure?  If we put lots
of changes in a single rule, will the "change made" be too complex?

Carl