[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Issue: ARGUMENTS-UNDERSPECIFIED (Version 3)
- To: chapman%aitg.DEC@decwrl.dec.com
- Subject: Issue: ARGUMENTS-UNDERSPECIFIED (Version 3)
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 88 22:07 EDT
- Cc: CL-Cleanup@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- In-reply-to: <8809200106.AA05432@decwrl.dec.com>, <8809191413.AA03664@decwrl.dec.com>
Since there is now a proposal on the table for dealing with START and
END arguments, why not just strike all wording in this proposal which
deals with those arguments. That way, we won't have to worry about the
order in which the incompatible proposals are approved.
ps If you're not on CL-Cleanup and so didn't see a copy, let me know
and I'll forward you one.