On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 05:53:44PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote: > I'll take that as my cue ;-). Ah, nothing like a man who knows when to pick up his cues. > <*shudder*> This whole business is getting pretty scary . . . [[ discussion of ugly implicatations elided ]] The short answer is that (assuming I understand Larry's statement) he'd like these issues addressed. If the resulting `best' answer is so complex and so ugly that he decides it's a bad idea, that's fine -- but (if I recall correctly) tcl has addressed this problem and come up with workable solutions. I'm not intimately familiar with them, but will get so.
- Re: English language basis for &q... skud
- Re: English language basis for &q... Piers Cawley
- Re: English language basis for &q... David L. Nicol
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module V... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module V... Graham Barr
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module V... Bennett Todd
- RFC 78 and shared vs unshared mod... Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC 78 and shared vs unshared... Bennett Todd
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Searchi... Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Sea... Ted Ashton
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And... Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning... Ted Ashton
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versi... Simply Hao
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Sea... Bennett Todd
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And... Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Searching Bart Lateur
- RE: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Searching Brust, Corwin