At 01:35 PM 8/2/00 +0900, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 12:16:33AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > From a language perspective, I have a scheme to allow us to yank all the > > cruft (sockets, shm, messages, localtime...) out into separate libraries, > > yet pull them in on demand without needing a use. > >Yep, yep. That's unquestionably the Right Thing. IMO. Would you like me to >do an RFC, or would you want more time working out the Plan? I'll take care of it in the morning. (It's half past Way Too Late here) Dan --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
- Stuff in core (was Re: date interface, on language (was ... Simon Cozens
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date interface, on langu... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date interface, on l... Simon Cozens
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date interface, ... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date interface, on l... Tim Bunce
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date interface, ... Tim Bunce
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date interfa... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date in... Tim Bunce
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: dat... Graham Barr
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: date in... Ken Fox
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re: dat... Nathan Torkington
- Re: Stuff in core (was Re:... Tim Bunce
- Re: C# (.NET) has no inter... Joshua N Pritikin
- Re: C# (.NET) has no inter... Ken Fox