Re: lynx-dev Any votes for a "simple" Lynx?

[Philip Webb]

980826 Nelson Henry Eric wrote: 
> having been able to compile a development version (22),
> it seems as if a few other little changes like this have crept in.
> I wonder if we could establish a BARE_BONES symbol
> that would be a kind of generic symbol to not compile in
> simple cosmetic changes which add code, no matter how miniscule.
 
the problems are probably that (1) everyone would want different bits
of the non-BARE_BONES features -- as you suggest yourself --
& (2) it's not the little features which have bloated Lynx
-- as TD suggested -- ; also (3) it's probably a lot of work
& (4) anything which is ifdef'd out doesn't get into the binary anyway.

as far as possible, new features should be optional,
with previous behaviour preserved, now easier with the options Form.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : address@hidden
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto