[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: preliminary GLISS discussions
From: |
Han-Wen Nienhuys |
Subject: |
Re: preliminary GLISS discussions |
Date: |
Wed, 5 Sep 2012 11:58:27 -0300 |
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> Isn't this an argument for delimiting the argument list?
>>>
>>> It is. The disadvantage is that it breaks all existing files.
>>
>> I think i remember one of the developers saying "we should also care
>> for future users, and that's [hopefully] a bigger group than current
>> users".
>
> Yes, I know. This was in a time that the future user base was much
> larger than the current one.
>
>> I don't mean that we should screw our current users - i mean that we
>> shouldn't get around design flaws that we'll be still cursing in 20
>> years from now :)
FWIW, we broke almost all files in a major way with the 1.8 => 2.0
transition, where we moved to postfix event notation, moving from
[a()b]
to
a[( b])
after that we have tried to limit the amount of syntax breakage we
would do. The quote you mention is certainly from before that time.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, (continued)
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, Joe Neeman, 2012/09/04
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2012/09/04
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, David Kastrup, 2012/09/04
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, Joe Neeman, 2012/09/04
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2012/09/04
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, Janek WarchoĊ, 2012/09/04
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2012/09/04
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions,
Han-Wen Nienhuys <=
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, David Kastrup, 2012/09/05
- Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, David Kastrup, 2012/09/04
Re: preliminary GLISS discussions, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2012/09/02