I'm sorry. My last response to Keann was too strong. I'm prepared to be
convinced that there is something here, and I'm also prepared to be
convinced that there may be a better way to express intentional
specialization than the one I'm imagining (indeed, I think we *need* a
better way than I presently have). But I'm *very* concerned about the
dynamic character of this.


shap
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to