David Levine <levinedl@acm.org> writes:
Norm wrote:
Ken writes:
Secondly, when a mh-format program is run, it _cannot_ fail; literally,
there's no facility for it to fail. When it gets compiled, yes, that can
fail. But return an error code? We don't really have a good way in
mh-format to deal with this. I think it might be too much.
I would be content to just ignore the exit status.
I don't think that's a good idea.
If it's not too much trouble for you, I'd like to understand why this is so.
I just committed the multiply function. It was trivial.
It might make a good M.S. history thesis to find out why it wasn't there
already.
My feeling about mh-format is that we shouldn't invest much more effort in
it. If there's a need for more capability, it should be tossed in favor
something else, ideally something that already exists.
That makes sense. I don't remember the history of mh-format, if I ever did
know it. But I imagine that it grew incrementally, like Topsy and that nobody
ever designed or wever would design what we have today.
But I share Ken's "Why bother?" at this point.
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers