3 ms·
Interesting! That is definitely different from how the maxim is commonly understood. Edit: actually, some of the replies in the thread you linked disagree with
by whipoodle 9y ago
Interesting! That is definitely different from how the maxim is commonly understood.
Edit: actually, some of the replies in the thread you linked disagree with this remembrance, and state that it really did mean what we take it to mean today.
- jcranmer 9y agoThe citations for the replies don't really back it up. The context for the various iterations of Postel's Law generally suggest that they're referring to the possibility that you might be seeing the result of mismatching versions of a specification. The later iterations also give reference to an explicit example of what they mean: don't assume that enumerations in the specification are closed (i.e., assume that future revisions may add additional enumerations). There is absolutely no evidence that he is advocating trying to parse slop at all.