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

# Re: Suggestion, re: Minimal.db

- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 17:46:38 PST
- From:
- Cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

    At 20:20 11/29/95, Lionel Clark wrote:
    >        The Autoport is a great mechanism.  I think if the
    >stablest forms can be compared and a best one chosen, that winner
    >should be placed in the new Minimal.  Whatever qualifies for
    >'best' is anyone's guess, however I like having it on one object
    >as suggested.

    <flame>

    Hmmms. Do we have the same definition of minimal and great mechanism ?
    A 700 lines verb that cause commands like @grep to run out of ticks is
    neither minimal nor great.
    It just perfom a job. If the users of that verb were less lazy they would
    have rewritten it... or is everyone disgusted by digging through 700 lines
    of code ? (No offense Def.)

    >        This may necessitate a standard for Moos - like #0, some
    > place where autoport can find pointers to 'known' objects -
    >perhaps Everyman has changed, or something like that.  That way
    >Autoport can correct code that is made Autoportable via keywords

    Ever heard about $sysobj and $no_one? no? maybe you should not port stuff...

    Do you port obj with your wizard character ? if yes, please leave me the
    address of your MOO... I will drop by...

    </flame>

    I love Pavel's 0 object minimal db, that's minimal. :)

    Janus (very lazy - why should I use @autoport when emacs does the job more
    quickly and without wiz perms ?)

Follow-Ups:

- Re: Suggestion, re: Minimal.db

- From: Lionel Clark <bishop@abbey.cuug.ab.ca>

- Prev: Suggestion, re: Minimal.db
- Next: Re: Suggestion, re: Minimal.db
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index