`tla' in particular seems to very loosely follow the GCS which I find a pity---likewise, I find it pitiful that it's really called `tla' instead of GNU Arch, that's again counter-harmonizing.
The thing with the GCS is that it has important parts, which people ignore, and then only read the bit about how to indent C code. The bits that people ignore are really the important one, how you indent the code is really unimportant as long as it is consitent. And from the brief look I have done on tla's inner workings, it actually follows most of those principles. As for the name, tla is far better than having a command called arch! _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
