|Perl: the Markov chain saw|
Re^6: Precedence design question...'x' & arithby perl-diddler (Hermit)
|on Jul 06, 2013 at 06:44 UTC||Need Help??|
You go on and on, about what might happen, but can't come up with one example where it is a problem? Are you familiar with the term F.U.D.?
I can see now that you don't care to prove your point, by providing any concrete examples that would show me the follow of my ways -- you just wish
to say 'no' and think that this isn't thought out. The more you argue the point without coming up with any good reasons why it's a problem the more you are making the argument that this issue is being well vetted.
Leaving original content above for reference.
I asked a question what would happen or what would be the impact of a particular design change. Instead of any specific examples, I got FUD.
On top of that people actually got annoyed when I called the morass of negativity that spewed out what it was -- in light of there being no cases to support any problems.
Someone else claims burden of proof is on person advocating for change.
I examined the possible cases -- noted that the only behavior change would be to allow a useful behavior in what previously would fail.
That is the proof. Before, with no change, nothing worked -- it fails. With the change, you get useful, positive behavior. So in ANY use case, at worst, you could get some other failure and be no worse off than before.
But with the change, you get positive and useful output.
How can you call that an absence of proof?