Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wh
ispered:
| However, since those funtions take up about 200 lines in the core, are
| very stable and relatively easy to document, what do we win by
| removing them?
|
| PS The idea of adding acos, asin and tan is good.
You just answered your own question. It is very difficult to add new
functions to the core. It is very easy to write new modules. Doesn't it
make sense that if you have to use Math::Trig to get to acos and friends,
you might as well make the language definition clean and say all of acos
friends should be in that module, not some in the core?
That's the basic goal behind my RFCs for moving things to modules. In
general, I hope to make the language cleaner, easier to learn and use, and
easier to extend. If at the same time the language became better
performing because of a removal of some of the core, all the better. As
you say, 200 lines isn't much. But combine that with the IPC, the
environment, the system, etc it all adds up.
-spp
