On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 17 June 2012 01:30, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Igor Stasenko wrote > >> > >> because 'announcer weak subscribe: ' is explicit > >> > > > > Either way, something is implicit. Why not make the common case implicit > and > > the uncommon one slightly more verbose? "Make common things easy, rare > > things possible" > > > I bet if you do that, some people will be alienated/antagonized by > this change (oh... its really hard > to make everyone happy). > > As a compromise i would suggest to force people to explicitly tell > their intent.. i.e. > if they want to subscribe strongly, then they should say: > > announcer strong on:.. > > and weakly, is > > announcer weak on:.. > > but if they do: > > announcer on: > > they shall get a DNU/error. > He, I like that! > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > >
