At 05:06 PM 8/15/00 -0400, John Porter wrote: >I think about the word some OO gurus use: "raise". I think that came from the kernel or hardware people before OO was around. Something about raising and lowering IPLs. -- Peter Scott Pacific Systems Design Technologies
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Dan Sugalski
- Re: English language basis for "throw" John Porter
- Re: English language basis for "throw" John Porter
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Nathan Torkington
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Peter Scott
- Re: English language basis for "throw" John Porter
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Stephen P. Potter
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Tony Olekshy
- Re: English language basis for "throw" John Porter
- Re: English language basis for "throw" John Porter
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Peter Scott
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Glenn Linderman
- Re: English language basis for "throw" John Porter
- Re: English language basis for "throw" skud
- Re: English language basis for "throw" Piers Cawley
- Re: English language basis for "throw" David L. Nicol
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Searching Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Searching Graham Barr
- Re: RFC 78 (v1) Improved Module Versioning And Searching Bennett Todd
- RFC 78 and shared vs unshared modules/data Steve Simmons
- Re: RFC 78 and shared vs unshared modules/data Bennett Todd