A disclaimer or two for Optional
forax at univ-mlv.fr
Wed Oct 23 10:08:26 PDT 2013
On 10/23/2013 04:47 PM, Tim Peierls wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com
> <mailto:brian.goetz at oracle.com>> wrote:
> They are more likely to behave, but the special pleading has two
> motivations, only one of which is addressed above:
> - discourage users from doing wrong things
> - provide cover so that when we break code that does wrong
> things, they were adequately warned
> In a perfect world, the visitor from Flatland would show up and
> lay the entire future out for us. We're a few days from Public
> Review; we're in "better than nothing" territory here.
> Isn't this a little like putting a warning about the dangers of
> addictive drugs only on the methadone because you don't have time to
> post general warnings about the harder drugs? Optional users are
> already in treatment. There's not much cover if you have to say, "You
> should have read the warning we clearly posted in the rehab clinic,"
> to users still on the street.
> If it would take more time to *not* add this disclaimer, then never
> mind. Otherwise, there are better uses of the few days remaining.
Given the previous discussions, there is also a good chance that
Optional became the new heroine.
More information about the lambda-libs-spec-experts