[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: KMP@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com
- Subject: Issue: FORMAT-COLON-UPARROW-SCOPE
- From: gls@Think.COM
- Date: Thu, 3 Dec 87 13:41:22 EST
- Cc: gls@Think.COM, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: Kent M Pitman's message of Tue, 1 Dec 87 11:25 EST <871201112532.6.KMP@RIO-DE-JANEIRO.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 87 11:25 EST
From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com>
I think the remark about aesthetics not counting at all in FORMAT is cute
but not strictly true. But since I don't have anything more consequential
to write there, I'll suggest the following compromise presentation which
(for the sake of casual readers and future historians) makes it more clear
that we're being flippant -- or at least less clear that we're being
``Absolutely none. We're talking about FORMAT here.'' -- Guy L. Steele, Jr.
I would accept this friendly amendment.