[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue LOCALLY-TOP-LEVEL, v1
- To: Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
- Subject: Issue LOCALLY-TOP-LEVEL, v1
- From: Kim A. Barrett <IIM%ECLA@ECLC.USC.EDU>
- Date: Sat 11 Mar 89 19:34:07-PST
- Cc: cl-cleanup@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, cl-compiler@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, iim%ECLA@ECLC.USC.EDU
This issue arguably ought to be a compiler issue, rather than cleanup, since
the compiler people seem to be the ones currently mucking about with what we
mean by top-level. (Besides, Larry is overworked as it is :-)
More seriously, I support this idea, in part because of the frob example. This
kind of thing was one of the reasons I voted against the DECLARATION-SCOPE
proposals.
By the way, my notes from the Hawaii meeting say that we passed the NO-HOISTING
proposal, and that LIMITED-HOISTING was not even called to a vote.
kab
-------