Re: Why shouldn't sleep(0.5) DWIM?

[Dan Sugalski]

At 10:37 PM 1/31/2001 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 10:18:19AM -0500, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Casey R. Tweten wrote:
> >
> > > <opinion>
> > > Not that there needs to be any discussion on this but IMHO things that
> > > can reasonably live outside the core should.  I heard somewhere that
> > > most people think this way too.
> >
> > This is why there hasn't been much discussion on it -- there's not really
> > much to discuss.
>
>
>Odd. I'd expect a lot of (pointless) discussion about it.
>
>     "It's reasonable for `foo' to live outside of the core!"
>     "No, it isn't!"
>     "Yes, it is; I never use it!"
>     "It should be in the core, I often use it!"

We've already done that one... :)

The core's going to look big, but be small, and I think if you want you can 
find a lot of the pointless discussion on the internals list archive somewhere.

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk