Re: 16-numeric-args.patch

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Arghh... confused.  Have you developed schizophrenia, Akim? :-)

On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 05:56:51PM +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> >>>>> "akim" == akim  <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> akim> On Sat, Oct 13, 2001 at 04:10:53PM +0100, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> >> so presumably that code has already stripped unquoted leading
> >> spaces by the time the builtin receives its argv?
> 
> akim> No, this is different.  Think of eval([ 1 + 1]).
> 
> Of course not.  Rather, divert([  1 ]).  Dead wrong to my eyes.
> 
> >> I think we are in agreement here, that normal m4 whitespace rules
> >> should apply to numeric arguments.  I am slightly worried about old
> >> code that relies on this "feature" though... perhaps Rene wrote it
> >> this way for compatibility with vendor M4?
> 
> akim> This is dead broken, extremely bad, puke!  Never ever put
> akim> features for novices which can make it harder for real hard core
> akim> programmers.  M4 programmers are aware of the rules, and having
> akim> an exception is a means to have unwanted phenomenons remain
> akim> hidden.
> 
> akim> I really don't want soft corners.  But that's my HO.
> 
> So?

-- 
  ())_. Gary V. Vaughan     gary@(oranda.demon.co.uk|gnu.org)
  ( '/  Research Scientist  http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk       ,_())____
  / )=  GNU Hacker          http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool  \'      `&
`(_~)_  Tech' Author        http://sources.redhat.com/autobook   =`---d__/