At Tue, 15 Oct 2013 22:40:54 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote: > Just now, Robby Findler wrote: > > Yes, I think that was the point of the original message: to figure out what > > consistent thing we think it should be. > > My point was in the "depending on what *I* generally want". I'm > saying that it much better to leave it consistent per some user > choice, since there are different types of users; in contrast to > finding some global default that would work for everyone. (Since I > believe there isn't such a default.)
I agree with that goal, but I don't see a way to get there in the near future. > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: > > > > It would be nice if it implied some consistent default, depending on > > what I generally want. Ie, I can be someone who just want the minimum > > -libs, or someone who always wants everything including the -tests. > > -- > ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: > http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
