[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: dylan availability
- To: kent@Camex.COM
- Subject: Re: dylan availability
- From: Bob Kerns <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 19:51:42 -0400
- Cc: uunet!cs.brown.edu!twl@uunet.UU.NET, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 29 Sep 92 18:27:56 EDT." <9209292325.AA08893@relay1.UU.NET>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 18:27:56 EDT
Please don't, this is interesting stuff! If I get a vote, I say keep going.
At risk of starting a meta-discussion:
I think info-dylan probably should be restricted to discussions
about the language visible to a user (that is, "can I write it
this way?" sorts of stuff). dylan-builders should probably
be of interest to those interested in how to implement dylan,
or detailed issues of meaning that primarly affect implementation.
Probably, general discussions like how to write compilers in
terms of themselves, or the use of subprimitives, or why you
don't HAVE to write stubs, probably don't belong on either one,
unless they relate to a specific implementation.
However, since I don't have a constructive suggestion for where
to move them, and I *do* believe those of us who have done a
few Lisps should share our experience, I'm not going to propose
forbidding them. At the same time, I would hate to distract
Apple's Dylan folks from such important stuff as >> finally telling
us about macros << (dig, dig, message to follow).
My suggestion: have such discussions for now on dylan-builders.
Responding to such things would be on a volunteer basis, and would
not fall on Apple's shoulders. If the volume becomes a problem,
move it to a separate list. If it grows beyond bounds, some of
the more experienced folk will drop out, depending on their
circumstances and patience, and can still stay on dylan-builders.
A varient would be the same plan, except on info-dylan.
O Keeper of the Lists, What Think Ye?