At 05:20 PM 8/15/00 -0400, John Porter wrote: >Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > > The ultimate target of a program's source code is the *programmer*. > > Programmers, being people (well, more or less... :), work best with > symbols > > and rich context. Stripping contextual clues out of code does the > > programmer a disservice. > >Then every proposal so far which would eliminate distinguishing symbols, >and/or the things they distinguish, is on the wrong track, eh? Yep. Nope. Tossing the worthless and confusing ones is good. Tossung the useless and distinguishing ones is bad. Dan --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get ri... John Porter
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's ge... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let'... John Porter
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise -... Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noi... John Porter
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noi... Ariel Scolnicov
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noi... John Porter
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noi... Ariel Scolnicov
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noi... David Corbin
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noi... David Corbin
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's ge... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let'... John Porter
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise -... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get ri... Karl Glazebrook
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's ge... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get ri... Clayton Scott
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get ri... Michael Fowler
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get ri... Graham Barr
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get ri... Kai Henningsen
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get rid of @% Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 109 (v1) Less line noise - let's get rid of... Casey R. Tweten