My point is more like that using project manager to "compile" standard library is an empty ritual, not unlike cargo cult. The idea of transforming source code into another, less readable form of the same source code before distribution, seems unnatural. I understand where it came from -- probably from the days when reading 150k script took noticably less time than reading 20 15k scripts. I doubt that this is a concern these days.
Having comments stripped out is just one harm that it does. There is another price to pay too. The "original" source code also becomes less readable, because it is intended to be processed by Project manager, rather than executed by t he system. This puts an obligation on the reader to learn intricacies of Project manager and how it combines its components. > From: Devon McCormick <[email protected]> > > We discussed this at NYCJUG a few months ago and I believe the consensus was > that comment-stripping was a project manager option, though I don't know > this for certain as I'm not familiar with it. > > I think there was also wide agreement that it would be helpful to leave in > comments. _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
