[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A proposal
- To: MURRAY%umass-cs.CSNet@CSNet-Relay.ARPA
- Subject: Re: A proposal
- From: Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: Wed, 07 May 1986 17:53:00 -0000
- Cc: common-lisp@su-ai.ARPA
- In-reply-to: MURRAY@umass-cs.CSNET's message of Mon, 5 May 86 14:47 EST
I agree that a DEFSYSTEM facility is useful. However, what its specs
should be are unclear. We just built an experimental system** using
objects that also supports incremental changes as well as version
control. Should facilities like these be included? It seems that we
are far from having a good handle on what is needed. This is to support
Dan Weinreb's contention that the system construction tool business is
still very volatile.
(** A copy of a short paper on defintion groups is available on
request. Send Snail-mail address.)