On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I recommend REMAND with instructions to explicitly evaluate the two > competing interpretations: > > +S) 2126 takes precedence, so 2156 implicitly defines the initial > limit and 2126's increases stick. > > -S) Even though 2126 takes precedence, 2126 only attempts to operate > once and 2156 attempts to operate conditionally, so 2126's > increases happen but 2156 comes along afterward and resets things.
Gratuitous arguments: An increase that remains in effect for an infinitesimal amount of time is no increase at all.
