[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Status of IGNORE-ERRORS
- To: KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
- Subject: Re: Status of IGNORE-ERRORS
- From: Masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: 30 Apr 87 14:45 PDT
- Cc: cl-cleanup@sail.stanford.edu, Daniels.pa@Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>'s message of Wed, 29 Apr 87 16:25 EDT
The only thing hanging up the signalling proposal is that that committee
(and mainly Kent Pitman) needs to bring it up before the next X3J13. It
is an excellent proposal and we should adopt it and get on with it.
There's no point in adopting IGNORE-ERRORS when we could get the whole
thing.
This was originally my paraphrase of Pavel's comments, but I've really
written what I think. At the meeting before X3J13 you were pretty
mysterious about your reasons for thinking the error proposal would take
too long, or longer than this committee would take.
Comments?