At 03:51 PM 7/2/98 +0200, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
Holger Schauer <schauer(a)coling.uni-freiburg.de> writes:
> >>>>"AP" == Andy Piper schrieb am Thu, 02 Jul 1998 12:19:29
+0100:
>
> AP> At 12:53 PM 7/2/98 +0200, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
> >> When using a subset of a standardized language, you can still
> >> write conformant programs. The reason to use the subset instead
> >> of the unabridged experience is, of course, efficiency.
>
> AP> I am dead against this. A subset loses us much of what we would
> AP> gain through swapping to a standard language engine. We would
> AP> just have eclisp instead of elisp which is just as bad IMHO.
>
> Thanks. I could not have said it better.
Only both of you got it wrong.
C'mon Hrvoje, that's not discussion - which is I believe what we are trying
to have.
andy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
" .sigs are like your face - rarely seen by you and uglier than you think"
Dr Andy Piper, Technical Architect, Parallax Solutions Ltd
mail: andyp(a)parallax.co.uk web:
www.parallax.co.uk/~andyp