On 09/11/2007, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
Jay Ashworth wrote:
The fundamental recurring argument seems to me to be "we can't do that; we'll break too much stuff."
The last time this came up (or maybe it was five or ten times ago; I can't keep track) I think I remember Brion stating pretty emphatically that no change to the parser could be contemplated if it broke *any* stuff. And on one level I think I agree: a cavalier change, that might break stuff and take some time to clean up after, is a very different prospect on a project with 100 pages, or even 10,000 pages, than it is on one with 2,000,000 pages.
So, where are we now?
* Document weird-arse constructs * Test against odd cases * See what would make our lives WAY easier to remove * See how often said annoying bit is actually used, i.e. if it's important * If not too much, is it fixable? * goto 1
- d.