On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 10:35:09AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
I agree. I think the trend should be to establish some permanent
sublists, which we're informally leaning towards already. Something
like:
-io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
-subs = ALL sub/method/func
At 04:12 PM 8/17/00 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 10:35:09AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
I agree. I think the trend should be to establish some permanent
sublists, which we're informally leaning towards already. Something
like:
-io = ALL I/O issues, like
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 11:15:40PM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
Sorry I didn't chime in earlier, but I would like to say that I prefer
published deadlines. Reason: people will talk for as long as you give
'em. However long a meeting is scheduled for, that's how long it will
take. We're
-io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
-subs = ALL sub/method/func issues, like lvalue subs
-strict = ALL lexical/global variable scoping issues
-objects = ALL OO and module issues
-flow = ALL flow/threading issues
-errors = ALL error
OK, weekly report. Ugh.
The language group has generated the vast majority of the 100+ RFCs in
existence, and is suffering under the deluge of 100-200 posts a day. I
would prefer this to be down around 50, but no luck yet :-/ Part of the
problem seems to be timezone related... the lag time
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The language group has generated the vast majority of the 100+ RFCs in
existence, and is suffering under the deluge of 100-200 posts a day. I
would prefer this to be down around 50, but no luck yet :-/ Part of the
problem seems to be timezone
"Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
... is the cause for this. All the discussion is taking place in the
master list before the sublists are spawned. You can only express the
opinion that foo is not bar and never should be so many times.
I agree. I think the trend should be to establish some
"NW" == Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
NW I agree. I think the trend should be to establish some permanent
NW sublists, which we're informally leaning towards already. Something
NW like:
NW-io = ALL I/O issues, like open/socket/filehandles
NW-subs = ALL
i see problems with overlapping areas. I/O callbacks fall under both io
and flow IMO. some of the error handling like dying deep in eval and
$SIG{DIE} also fall under error and flow.
True. But it should be up to the RFC author to choose the relevant list.
I think RFC authors have been pretty
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 02:38:33PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
i see problems with overlapping areas. I/O callbacks fall under both io
and flow IMO. some of the error handling like dying deep in eval and
$SIG{DIE} also fall under error and flow.
This is true, and inevitable. But IMHO it'd be
10 matches
Mail list logo
