Re: 48 and 72 ET

[David Kastrup]

Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:

>> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:35, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>> Hans Åberg <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>>> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:16, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> So is there any reason people don't use convert-ly when upgrading to
>>>> a newer version?
>>> 
>>> For libraries, you would want to keep track of the changes, but
>>> running convert-ly and do a diff is a good suggestion.
>> 
>> convert-ly -d inserts an updated \version header.
>
> You wouldn't want to do that with library headers, in case something
> goes wrong. Better to create a separate file, and check file dates, as
> in a Makefile.
>
>>> Though doing it by hand was quicker, as I remembered the issue and
>>> which files needed to be fixed.
>> 
>> How does _this_ "keep track of the changes"?  Maybe you consider your
>> biological memory part of the data on your computer?
>
> I cannot parse this.

You said "you would want to keep track of the changes" as a reason to do
changes manually rather than by convert-ly.  I tried reading some sense
into that statement but apparently we have very little common ground
regarding what we consider making sense.

>> It's a common fallacy of young programmers that may take a few decades
>> to cure.
>
> Nor this.

Basically the same idea.  Young programmers don't need to write comment
or documentation since "it's all in their heads" where they keep track
of changes.  But since that apparently wasn't what you were getting at,
never mind.

-- 
David Kastrup