Re: [MiNT] Re[2]: Re[3]: usage of wind_calc()

[Lonny Pursell <atari@bright.net>]

on 7/12/2005 5:25 PM, Ingo Schmidt wrote:

> Hi Zorro!
> 
>> I have only a wish: "don't break the compatibility".
> 
> Well, if thats the only concern, then we dont have a problem!
> 
> How would this new operating mode break compatibility? You can use it
> or not.
> 
> If you like it and think it will ease your programming: Use it!
> 
> If you dont like it and see no benefit: Dont use it!
> 
> It is as simple as that!

I also don't see a problem either if something is 100% optional.
 
> I dont think ozk wants to get rid wind_calc entirely. Well, yes, maybe
> in new apps, where it can be avoided. But it has to be there all the
> time otherwise a whole big bunch of software would be ruled out
> immediately - and no one wants that!

Just for a moment consider toolbars.  Simply because magic has no toolbar
support, virtually no one ever uses the actual calls.  So as it goes the
least evolved AES holds development back.  Everybody uses bulky libs to get
around it. I call that case in point.  So just like toolbars are optional so
is ozk's new feature.

But if one uses a real toolbar you will see your code base shrink and
complexity goes way down.  You will also see it fail on magic.
So what's the difference?

It also seems like a double standard.  It is acceptable that magic can lack
_many_ standard calls (and not just in the AES), but heaven forbid you add a
new _optional_ call to xaaes.

What I am hearing is people simply afraid that someone one _might_ actually
decided to use this new feature then magic is out the door or even naes or
some other aes.

If the trend is to avoid new calls, which clearly magic has blazed the trail
for... then there should be no fear, as nobody will use the new calls.    So
why get all bent out of shape.  ;-)))

-- 
Lonny Pursell    http://www.bright.net/~gfabasic/