Peter Memishian wrote: > > > > The script must not look like a > > > ransom note. > > > > Uhm... what do you mean with "ransom note" ? > > I mean that it needs to be consistent in style. If you want to improve > BFU, by all means go ahead. But changing 0.2% of the script to have a > different style -- even if that style is better -- is not an improvement.
Well, my idea was to do it incrementally, e.g. step by step with multiple putbacks while making sure that all new stuff uses the "new" style... ... any idea who may be interested to sponsor an "all in one" patch (where "all in one" means first the "easy", low-risk changes (e.g. replace existing Bourne-style constructs with the equivalent ksh constructs etc.) and the more complex changes in a 2nd putback). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
