🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <FRIEDMAN.92Jul24042018@nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu> friedman@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Noah Friedman) writes:
:    Ah yes, features.  What would we do without them?  Probably get more
: work done, instead of endlessly tweaking our environments to no useful end.
: 
:    I probably have the most complicated initialization scripts that anyone
: has ever devised (if you don't believe me, email me and we can arrange to
: compare).  One of these days, when I come to my senses, I'll switch to rc
: and use it vanilla.
: 
:    Features?  You need features like you need poison ivy. 

This is an oversimplification of reality, or at least a misdefinition of
that poor, defenseless word "feature".  The so-called minimalists like to
spout such nonsense:  "Simplicity at any cost!  Make my life easy--I don't
care how hard it makes yours.  Anything new simply MUST be unnecessary,
since we got along without it before."

Horsepucky.

Any proposed feature must be evaluated on its own merits.  A feature
that lets you change the color of a particular widget is just one more
complication to remember--I can understand your antipathy.  But a
feature that makes all your other features twice as powerful is getting
on towards being a necessity.  But it's still a feature.

Are you proposing that we demote the word "feature" to a mere pejorative?
We've already desemanticized far too many words in English.  Such villainy! :-)

Larry Wall
lwall@netlabs.com