CLOS in the standard

[masinter.pa@Xerox.COM]

What I voted on and what appears in the minutes is that CLOS is part of the
standard, as much as anything else in CLtL. Some people are considering ways of
making parts of the standard "optional" or somehow dividing it, but those would
have to come as future proposals. Given the votes for and against, I think you
voted for the same motion. "for inclusion in the Common Lisp language being
specified by this committee" doesn't mean "as an optional component", any more
than sequence functions or format or ED, TRACE and BREAK are optional.

I'm suprised by your remark. Since "the usual editorial and cleanup processess"
means that this committee will be handling some of the CLOS-related changes, I'd
have expected to hear from you before now if you were going to propose to make
CLOS "optional".


- - - - - - - -
Subject: DRAFT Minutes June meeting
 From: MATHIS@A.ISI.EDU
To: x3j13@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Message-ID: <[A.ISI.EDU] 7-Jul-88 10:29:46.MATHIS>

DRAFT
Minutes of the X3J13 Meeting, Boston, June 15, 16 1988.

....
            Dick Gabriel moved, and Larry Masinter seconded, to change the
              motion to the following:

              The X3J13 Committee hereby accepts chapters 1 and 2
              of the Common Lisp Object System, as defined in document
              88-002R, for inclusion in the Common Lisp language being
              specified by this committee. Subsequent changes will be handled
              through the usual editorial and cleanup processes.

              The motion passed 22-0.

            The original motion, as amended, passed 24-1.