On 07-Nov-1998, Erik Meijer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Another reason is that allowing definitions to be split up > >without any special syntax indicating this would harm readability. ... > This is *exectly* the reasoning I am opposed to. It is not to the language > designer to decide for me what is readable of not! My point is that the existence of the feature harms readability *even for code that doesn't use it*. -- Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "Binaries may die WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | but source code lives forever" PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- leaked Microsoft memo.
- derive conflicts with multiply-defined and module le... S. Alexander Jacobson
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Erik Meijer
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Fergus Henderson
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Erik Meijer
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Jon . Fairbairn
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Fergus Henderson
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Lennart Augustsson
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Erik Meijer
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... S. Alexander Jacobson
- Re: derive conflicts with multiply-defined and ... Fergus Henderson