On 9/10/10 3:55 PM, Pal Engstad wrote: > Lazyness by default would make me turn away from using BitC, > and I am sure a lot of other industrial users would too.
I never said BitC should be lazy by default. I was merely answering a question about whether some of the benefits of laziness could be had without making it the default, and addressing FUD about the performance of laziness. -- Live well, ~wren _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
