> Here's hoping I don't have to prove that, and Larry will just reject > this proposal outright. :) I would hope that *no* proposal would be rejected "outright", otherwise we might miss some real opportunities. Here's hoping that you *do* have to prove what you're saying. That would give everyone a chance to learn about any problems and perhaps help solve them. Matt
- RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration Path Perl6 RFC Librarian
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration Path Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration Pat... Matt Youell
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migra... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/... Randal L. Schwartz
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integrat... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integrat... Matt Youell
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migra... Matt Youell
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migra... Matt Youell
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integrat... Matt Youell
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration Path Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration Pat... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 161 (v2) OO Integration/Migration... Steve Fink