lint for D

[Bruce Adams]

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:43:08 +0100, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:

>
> How can having extra *optional* functionality in a tool possibly cause  
> any
> actual *practical* problems (ie, other than the highly abstract notion of
> purity)? I can't think of a single realisic scenario where the  
> difference in
> the following two snippets would actualy make a real difference:
>
> makecoffee  ...args...
> jumpupanddown ...args...
>
> vs:
>
> multitool -makecoffee ...args...
> multitool -jumpupanddown ...args...
>
> I can understand that keeping separate tasks in separate tools can be
> considered nice and clean and give me a warm fuzzy feeling. But, what  
> real
> concrete difference could it possibly make?
>

Its more a philosphical point. If you are given something for free you
are more likely to use it and therefore be tied down by its limitations.
Though it might also be the hook you need to look further affield for  
something
better.
Another risk is dilluting the effort. More work spent on adding bells and  
whistles
is less spent on making the engine perform its job well.
A third risk is introducing bugs by violating the KISS principle (keep it  
simple stupid).

Still you can have the best of both worlds as has already been discussed  
by having
one program to instantiate them all and in the build process run them.