Re: lynx-dev Dead code removal

[Philip Webb]

990308 John Bley wrote:
> 990308 Kim DeVaughn wrote:
>> For the sake of "completeness" (by some metric),
>> it may be better to leave them in.
> Which is kinda why I was asking about their history.
> If they have a chance of being used/implemented sometime soon,
> leave them in or comment them out in some way.
> otherwise, it means they sit there forever
> until somebody asks the question again.

you mention history: Lynx developed & expanded rapidly from a small start
& there may well be a lot of bits lying around from that time,
which the earlier developers had an idea of returning to one day,
but never got back to.  if only for ease of maintenance,
your project seems well worthwhile.  also, even in my tiny explorations,
there are areas of almost-duplicate code, which might be better functionised.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto