🚀 go-pugleaf

In message <9104161117.AA09240@phoebus.larc.nasa.gov> C. Michael Holloway wrote:
> 
> I disagree strongly here.  These exhibits show that Kyle is guilty of not
> updating the documentation frequently enough; but that's all they show.  At
> least on my system (Sun-3), frequent use of \[---] style documentation slows
> down the help functions to the point of making them unusable.

"But it's the Wrong Thing!" he cried...

Look, how about this, what if the documentation strings were in \[] form, but
there was a function that would go through and collapse them all (replace the
strings in place.)  You could call this from your init file or before dumping
emacs.

Or the makefile could do this, and dump a file which when loaded would replace
the docstrings in place.  You could (require) this from your .vm file if you
wanted it.

Or you could get a real computer :-)  What are you using, a 3/50?  I never saw
a docstring that took longer than a second or two to generate when I had a
3/60 on my desk.
			-- Jamie

PS: I feel this is relevant:

In message <9104101328.AA01216@life.ai.mit.edu> Olin Shivers wrote:
>
> In the early pdp-11 days, Unix programs had the following design parameters:
> 
> 	1. It doesn't have to be good, or even correct
> but
> 	2. It has to be small.
> 
> Thus the toolkit approach, and so forth.
> 
> Of course, over time, computer hardware has become progressively more 
> powerful -- processors speed up, address spaces move from 16 to 32 bits, 
> memory gets cheaper, and so forth.
> 
> So rule 2 has been relaxed.
> 
> Does that help put X, Motif and csh into perspective?

Let's not let puny, increasingly uncommon limitations fuck up an otherwise
quite good program.