Talk:Overlay (programming)
About that merge
I reverted the changes to this article, but I left standing the change of Overlays to a redirect, and I'm about to remove the mergefrom tag from here. There was really nothing in the other article worth saving and a fair share of what it had to say was misleading. Atlant 17:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- I thought my merge was cleaner. Why not restore the many wiki links that you reverted? Which is clearer:
- Mine: This operation is similar to virtual memory, but is not fully automatic or transparent to the programmer in the same way; instead, the overlay strategy...
- Revert: This operation is similar to virtual memory, but is not usually not fully-automatic or transparent to the programmer; instead, the overlay strategy...
- Shouldn't this be a compsci stub like I had it? I think you may want to go back and pick and choose the reverts you're not happy with, it is not all junk. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib Reverts 17:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- The biggest problem with your merge was the overall tone. It immediately dove into the multi-pass compiler stuff, and that's only a small corner of the much larger world of overlays and what they're used for. I'd be happy to do another edit of this article, comparing your diffs, but I haven't got the time right now, and the revised article was just too far off base. Maybe this evening...