On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 8:52 PM G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robin...@gmail.com> wrote: > At 2025-02-24T03:36:28+0100, onf wrote: > > I think the point is that such filenames aren't being used, > > No, that's not "the point". It's _your_ point,
Hey, originally it was *my* point :-P > > so breaking compatibility (and making adding comments to these > > requests annoying) > > Your annoyance is a subjective thing. I find inconsistent programming > language grammar _more_ annoying. All of our views about design trade-offs are subjective. Tolerating a slightly inconsistent grammar for a more back-compatible, more DWIM syntax is a perfectly reasonable position. Still, it's hard to gather consensus when only three people have expressed opinions at all, and one of them only tepidly. For me, it's not a hill I even care about lingering on very long, let alone dying on, and if it's equally NBD to everyone else, it might end up being an executive decision in the end. But I see merit in both approaches, and I don't think your greater annoyance at one automatically makes it inferior.
