Rob wrote:
Defending silly algorithms in code with limitations in old hardware no longer in use in running systems seems a bit silly to me.
Any abstraction _must_ cover all variations that are sensible or expectable. An abstraction that only covers the smallest common set of features and that attaches to the available set of most extended limitations is just broken. An abstraction should have a builtin mechanism for extensions ( and be "innoculated" against possibly resulting breakage.). uwe _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
