[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: DO-SYMBOLS-DUPLICATES (Version 2)
- To: cl-cleanup@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- Subject: Issue: DO-SYMBOLS-DUPLICATES (Version 2)
- From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1987 00:44 EDT
- In-reply-to: Msg of 30 May 1987 00:16-EDT from Masinter.pa at Xerox.COM
- Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
I support DO-SYMBOLS-DUPLICATES:ALLOWED.
I don't think we should present X3J13 with two alterantives on a dumb
issue like this. If someone really feels strongly about the keyword
version and wants to produce a correct and complete version of the
keyword proposal in the next couple of days, I would be willing to go
along with that instead. But in any case, I think we should decide
among ourselves and only bring one proposal out of this committee.
If we do go with a keyword version, I feel rather strongly that the
default must be to allow duplicates. In most cases, the issue of
duplicates really doesn't matter, and we don't want to saddle users with
a much more expensive default.