On 9/20/07, Jeremy O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "there's no stupid limit on its source size, we have features we want." > > That seems rather combative! Are you calling Anselm stupid?
I wouldn't have used the word "stupid", but I personally think excessively concentrating on SLOC tends to lead to more contorted, difficult to read/modify code than making the goal that "programs have a well-defined purpose with no more AND NO LESS features than are relevant for this purpose". I particularly thinks it's a mistake to remove well-thought out, useful features because "it removes lines of code". -- cheers, dave tweed__________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rm 124, School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading. "we had no idea that when we added templates we were adding a Turing- complete compile-time language." -- C++ standardisation committee
