On 15.04.2017 10:45, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/14/2017 10:04 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
I don't buy that aiming for inconsistencies is a way to
make a system more intuitive when the user didn't have prior exposure
to a
similar system.
Please propose a better design.
I'm criticizing the justification, not the design. (Hence OT.)
What I'm saying is that there is no way that lack of
orthogonality/consistency can be an argument in favour of the design.
The arguments in favour of the design (that I can see) are that it is
simple, easy to explain, easy to implement, easy to ignore, that it
works around the problem, and that it is your own.
