That's my point. There are no LRM examples showing the case one way or the other because it was never considered, which means that the functionality was not intended. Adding functionality requires a positive intention. Lack of an explicit negative intention is not enough. The LRM does not say that writing "A=1;" does not set off a global thermonuclear explosion, either, but I don't think that was intended... Shalom > If there were really any LRM examples that "clearly imply that import > chaining was not intended", then testing with the LRM examples would > have revealed a mismatch between the intent and what seems obvious under > the file system analogy.Received on Sat Sep 16 13:03:22 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Sep 16 2006 - 13:05:15 PDT