[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] feature request

From: Christian Anthon
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] feature request
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 00:06:35 +0100

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Michael Petch <address@hidden> wrote:

> Oystein suggested its removal, but no one gave a final reason. Of course the
> weights and evaluation will not make sense for these variants (It appears
> GnuBG may have warned the user of this).

I'm too tired to give a proper answer, so here is the reasons.

a) it wasn't used
b) it wasn't properly supported
c) we cannot properly support it
d) we will not properly support it
e) nobody complained at the time
f) we are drowning in options, many of them are largely unused
g) we are likely to have bugs in options few people use
h) we are more likely to have bugs in the code because we have to
allow for strange options
i) the rule it self is an abomination

You are free to choose one ;)

There are other existing options that you can argue the same about,
and these too may be removed following a short discussion here, and an
agreement by the silent majority.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]