I agree with Gregg. The model of the benevolent dictator (is that correct English?) seems the best.
See Linus(x) as well. --maarten > Hi Mark, > > << My point is that by conciously deciding to disable the pair! datatype to > be used with the greater than / less than comparator function, for the > reasons Holger outlined, which i disagree with and are an unneccesary and > artificial restriction in my opinion, then the pair! datatype is "lame" in > comparison with some of the other numeric datatypes, tuple!'s as I gave in > my example spring immediately to mind. >> > > I can see things both ways. On one hand, we can say "we want all datatypes > to support all operations", OTOH that may not be the best design choice and, > if doing so severely impacted performance for the most common usage, or > added bugs, we'd probably complain about that. :) > > I think it's RT's job, maybe their hardest one, *not* to give us everything > we ask for. If they did, REBOL would become a language designed by committee > and would suffer greatly for it, IMO. That's one of the reasons I'm > *opposed* to them making it open source at this time. Maybe someday, when > the language has matured, it would work but I'm not even sure about that. > I'm a big believer in the power of conceptual integrity and that's hard to > maintain in a large group, or even a small one. :) > > --Gregg > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the > subject, without the quotes. > -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
