[QUOTE]\nAs to the "whole is greater than the sum of the parts" idea, I\nbelieve if individual changes don't stand on their own merits,\nthen it's even worse to include them as a group. Let's take the\n'const'-defined array bound as an example. This language feature\nadds no significant expressive power to the language; it's\nsimply another way of doing something that can already be done\nwith about the same amount of code writing. There may be some\nthings about it that are better, and some things that are worse,\nbut certainly it isn't clearly better -\- it's just different. So\nnow what happens if rather than one of those we add 25 of them?\n[/QUOTE]\nJust yesterday I was writing an Ising model (about to go on sourceforge).\nNothing serious, just a framework for people to mess about with and\nsee the results graphically.\nBut you need a decent random number generator for Monte Carlo simulations.\nFortunately the inventor of the Mersenne twister has provided source\ncode. But in C99. It #includes stdint.h, and in makes heavy use of\ninline functions, defined in the header. Microsoft's C++ compiler which\nI have to use doesn't understand this. So I had to move all the inline\nfunctions into the main body of the file, and typedef the stdint types.\nQuite a bit of work, even for a small routine.\nIn programming, the trivial is important, because of they way that one\ntiny glitch can break an entire build (or worse, an entire program).\n\nIt's better to add 25 small changes in a bundle than introduce them one\nby one, however. Then the code is either C89 or C += 0.5, you don't have\n25^2 patching possibilities, every one of which needs testing before\nyou can be absolutely sure it won't break.