> There wouldn't be any need to make a new language. I can change anything I want in this one. > I'm not deeply committed to the current approach to iteration.

> There wouldn't be any need to make a new language. I can change anything I want in this one. > I'm not deeply committed to the current approach to iteration. But I don't want to switch to something more complicated till I can prove it's a net win. Paul, this doesn't sound right. Prove that a given change is a net win? Since you obviously can change anything you want at any time, why not go ahead and add the features that seem like they might be worth trying out? See what your users do with them. If the changes/additions turn out to be duds, just rip them out in the next version and let a subset of users whine about it. After all, users will whine either way -- may as well take the path that benefits Arc the most, right?