"Michael Kay" <michael(_dot_)h(_dot_)kay(_at_)ntlworld(_dot_)com> wrote in
message
news:000a01c2d4e4$e2b61150$6401a8c0(_at_)pcukmka(_dot_)(_dot_)(_dot_)
It's a bicycle-shed issue. The committee spent hours wrangling and
agreed on a messy compromise that satisfies no-one.
Why, for what pressing reason, had this to be put in the
specification?
What are the use-cases, whose solution depends significantly
on this feature?
Some people regard the ability to have two variables with the same name
as a feature that needs to be justified.
Some people regard the inability to have two variables with the same
name as a restriction that needs to be justified.
The latter group won.
Thank you Mike for explaining how decisions are taken in the committee.
Shall I conclude that there were no user requirements and use-cases that
required taking this decision?
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list