Sunday 18 August 2002 00:38, Simon Cozens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
> > Has someone looked at and maybe committed this?
>
> The reason I asked which pieces of Parrot were prototypes was
> because optimizing the hell out of something that's only a
> prototype is nothing shor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Sugalski) writes:
> Has someone looked at and maybe committed this?
The reason I asked which pieces of Parrot were prototypes was because
optimizing the hell out of something that's only a prototype is nothing
short of intellectual masturbation, and it seems nobody actually
At 8:45 AM +0200 8/7/02, Angel Faus wrote:
>Dan Sugalski escribió:
>> At 8:40 AM +0200 8/6/02, Angel Faus wrote:
>> >The point about the lack of documentation remains, and i will
>> > solve it as soon as i get an indication that the design is ok.
>>
>> The design's fine, and we can add what we
