john gilmore wrote:
I am as aware as EJ is of the historical use that has been made of SNs to maintain source programs, and I mentioned this role for them explicitly in the post he comments upon. We differ about the desirability of continuing to use them. So be it.
Don't misunderstand me! We do *not* differ about the desirability of continuing to use sequence numbers. Personally, I don't like them. I prefer "unnumbered" source for programs not distributed to customers.
My objection was to your assertion that the use of sequence numbers is now 'obsolete'. That would be a valid statement only if a viable alternative to their use for source-maintained programs existed. Unfortunately, one does not.
-- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90045 310-338-0400 x318 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
