From: Andreas Huber (ahd6974-spamgroupstrap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-20 10:54:39
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
> Andreas Huber wrote:
>> Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
> I forgot to respond to part of your message.
>>> What I would like to see in the rationale is a
>>> comparison of a small handful (2-5) of alternate implementation
>>> technique, either approaches taken by other libraries or approaches
>>> you tried yourself early in development, together with an
>>> explanation of why they fail to satisfy the requirements.
>> That's interesting. I was under the impression that exactly such a
>> list of alternate implementation techniques would not satisfy you,
>> because it would in no way show that the design I chose is the best
> Why not? That would be the main point.
I don't understand. A list of alternate techniques would show that none
of these techniques satisfies the requirements but it doesn't say
anything why the current FSM implementation performs worse than any of
-- Andreas Huber When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap from the address shown in the header.