Re: +2 Axe of Refactoring: packfile.c

2002-03-11 Thread Simon Cozens
Brent Dax: > What about the C-level compiler? Will this still be included in the > core? It'll be in the core, but it won't be linked in with the interpreter that we're playing around with. I'm expecting we'll come up with a separate compiler library of Useful Things to be used by people writing

RE: +2 Axe of Refactoring: packfile.c

2002-03-10 Thread Brent Dax
Simon Cozens: # People were complaining about bloat already? Well, I'm not a # great believer in # taking 1800 lines to do what you can do more clearly in 700; # nor taking 43 # functions, many of which are completely unused, to do the # work of 14. This # refactoring does not attempt to disguise

Re: +2 Axe of Refactoring: packfile.c

2002-03-10 Thread Michael G Schwern
(Apologies to Michael Brown) Yesterday on perl6-intern-, packfile.c died. And they got that brit Simon on a charge of homicide Some folks say he didn't do it others say of course he did But they all agree, Mr Simon C. was a problem kinda kid 'Cause you can't chop your Parrot up on Perl 6 Porters

+2 Axe of Refactoring: packfile.c

2002-03-10 Thread Simon Cozens
People were complaining about bloat already? Well, I'm not a great believer in taking 1800 lines to do what you can do more clearly in 700; nor taking 43 functions, many of which are completely unused, to do the work of 14. This refactoring does not attempt to disguise the fact that C is not objec