From owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Wed Jun 25 22:47:55 2003 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) id h5PKltks061760 for sc22wg5-domo; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:47:55 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk) X-Authentication-Warning: ptah.dkuug.dk: majordom set sender to owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk using -f Received: from mailhub.dfrc.nasa.gov (mailhub.dfrc.nasa.gov [130.134.81.12]) by dkuug.dk (8.12.8p1/8.9.2) with ESMTP id h5PKk2Ec061747 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:47:51 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from maine@altair.dfrc.nasa.gov) Received: from mail.dfrc.nasa.gov by mailhub.dfrc.nasa.gov with ESMTP for sc22wg5@dkuug.dk; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:42:05 -0700 Received: from altair.dfrc.nasa.gov ([130.134.20.211]) by mail.dfrc.nasa.gov (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-71686U2500L200S0V35) with ESMTP id gov for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:44:41 -0700 Received: by altair.dfrc.nasa.gov (Postfix, from userid 201) id A5C3A35087; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:44:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Richard Maine MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <16122.2483.584383.197850@altair.dfrc.nasa.gov> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:44:35 -0700 To: sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Subject: (SC22WG5.2824) Submodule association and host association In-Reply-To: <200306251958.h5PJwZRQ061483@dkuug.dk> References: <200306251824.h5PIOkHx060871@dkuug.dk> <200306251958.h5PJwZRQ061483@dkuug.dk> X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under 21.4 (patch 12) "Portable Code" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-sc22wg5@dkuug.dk Precedence: bulk P.S. quoted stuff somehow got intermixed in a way that made most of this pretty hard to read - I couldn't tell when it switched from quoting something to saying something new; had to deduce from context. Perhaps it showed up better in the html version, but I don't read html in email. Bill Long writes: > But in a previous post the philosophy seemed to be "even if there is no > need for a feature we should not disallow it". I think the problem > with that philosophy is the difficulty in drawing the line between > "artificial restriction" and "feature bloat". The other problem I see > is that the length of the feature list is roughly proportional to the > time you have to wait before an actual compiler implementation appears. Allowing a variable to be named Ralph isn't an extra feature. Disallowing it would be an arbitrary restriction. That one seems easy. This might not be quite as obvious, but it seems in the same camp to me. I just don't see this one as a separate feature at all. Depending on the exact wording, there's a fair chance that we would need to explicitly write it as a restriction in order to disallow it. If you have to say "except that it can't be in the same module or submodule", then that's sure going to look like an arbitrary restriction to me. As soon as I see something like that, I wonder "why not?", and I know I'll have to explain it to others with the same question. Depending on the exact wording, you might manage to define terms in such a way as to avoid writing such a restriction, but I wouldn't count on it. Note, by the way, that there is no restriction against this in the existing drafts. Whether it is a feature or the lack of an arbitrary restriction, it isn't new in either case. That to me tells part of the story right there - that this subject is comming up as a proposal to change the draft in order to disallow it. No, this wasn't just something that "some people at meeting 164" wanted to allow. It is in N1482 from a year ago (I didn't look back farther than that). I think that characterising it as something that "some people at meeting 164" wanted to allow presents it in a prejudicial manner (well, I suppose everything is prejudicial, but I tend to particularly notice it when my prejudices are different). There wasn't a proposal at meeting 164 to allow it...because no such proposal would have been needed. There might have been a proposal to disallow it, and some people might have objected to that. -- Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience; Richard.Maine@nasa.gov | experience comes from bad judgment. | -- Mark Twain