Charles Fusner <cfu### [at] enternet> wrote:
: Sure it makes perfect senese. But isn't that what the new 
: "no_bump_scale" keyword already does? I figured Nathan added
: it because of the controversy over the new normal behaviour
: so you could retain the ability to do a "pattern only"
: transformation if you wanted.

  1) I didn't know of the existance of such keyword.

  2) What a strange name. Wouldn't "no_normal_scale" be better and more
     descriptive?

  3) I really didn't mean this. What I meant was that there should be a
     way to scale the pattern independently of the normal. This means that
     after scaling the pattern it should be possible to scale the whole
     normal statement (which would scale both the pattern and the normal).
     I don't like the "scale pattern or normal, but not both" type of
     scaling.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message