[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: critical issues

From: Keith OHara
Subject: Re: critical issues
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 19:22:18 -0800
User-agent: Opera Mail/11.00 (Win32)

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 16:31:23 -0800, Trevor Daniels <address@hidden> wrote:
... the concern I had was this.  Quite a lot of the
documentation was written, not by inspecting the code
to see what was intended, but by experimenting and
writing up what was found.  I certainly worked that
way, and I think Mark and Keith did recently in
documenting the new spacing stuff.

Pretty much.  If it makes you feel better, I did read a fair bit of the code to 
help build up a mental model of how things worked.  You remember that we 
rejected documenting those cross-staff collisions, until the code made it clear 
to me that some collisions were intentional, and possibly unavoidable.  More 
generally, we naturally sort our experimental findings into possible-bugs and 

Now if you can work
in something about "working as intended or documented"

That sounds good, and natural.
In most people's minds, documented implies intended.

reply via email to

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