[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposal #5 status
- To: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
- Subject: Re: Proposal #5 status
- From: masinter.PA@Xerox.COM
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1986 00:06:00 -0000
- Cc: common-lisp@SU-AI.ARPA
- In-reply-to: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU's message of Sun, 27 Jul 86 18:23 EDT, <FAHLMAN.12226116535.BABYL@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
the reason I gave you only 7 points out of 10 on being a moderator
(besides that I'm a tough grader) is that you took the opportunity under
the guise of "summarizing" to submit another proposal.
I don't like returning 5 values when 3 well chosen ones will do, like
Swiss Army Knife software.
Of all of the proposals, I liked the one which returned any declarations
expanded and the body non-expanded the best; I liked it better than your
new synthesis, where in the common case the parse-body code has to
return more, and the caller has to discard more.