On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 02:03:30PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: SL> I really don't think that the form that contains the *most* SL> information is necessarily the best, because this prevents someone SL> from improving the source by removing *extraneous* information. If SL> two forms of source code compile to give identical binaries, which SL> form contains more information -- the one with pointless comments SL> and more KLOCs, or the one that's more concise and easier to read?
Another case to the point that the source is _both_ versions together, in chronological order. Also, if you want to use 'the most informative' as a guideline to determining the 'preferred form for making modifications', revision history is definitely more informative than either of these versions alone. -- Dmitry Borodaenko
