[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue: TEST-NOT-IF-NOT (Version 1)
- To: masinter.pa%Xerox.COM@multimax
- Subject: Re: Issue: TEST-NOT-IF-NOT (Version 1)
- From: Dan L. Pierson <pierson%mist@multimax.ARPA>
- Date: Mon, 03 Oct 88 13:14:32 EDT
- Cc: cl-cleanup%sail.stanford.edu@Multimax
- In-reply-to: Your message of 02 Oct 88 14:32:00 -0700. <881002-143242-2709@Xerox>
I like the combination of FUNCTION-COMPOSITION and removing :TEST-NOT
and -IF-NOT from the language but am a little worried about breaking
existing programs. Maybe this is place where we should formally
depricate a feature. This would mean that:
1. Implementations would be required to support :TEST-NOT and
-IF-NOT until the next revision of the standard.
2. The feature would appear in a special backwards compatability
section of the standard.
3. Textbooks and instructors would be encouraged not to teach
4. Users would be warned not to use the feature for new code and
to migrate existing code away from it.
Since most existing implementations will probably feel required to do
this sort of thing anyway for the convenience of their current
customer base, maybe we should make it official.
On the other hand, if everyone else just wants to dump this feature,
I'll go along.