I was going to wait until I had a chance to read the pre-proposal before commenting. However, perhaps it is best that I voice my concerns. I don't think that this idea of conservatively X-ing out all the possibly modified variables is very practical. By the time you make it conservative enough to be fairly sure it is not optimistic, I think it will be so pessimistic as to be unusable in anything but simple situations. I think this could be taking the same path as unique/priority, sounding good on paper, but running into problems in real life. Only I think it is likely to be much worse. This would be a good time to fall back on the principle of requiring an implementation to prove out the concept before adding it to the standard. If any implementors think that this concept is promising, they can work out the issues with it before we standardize anything. If none of the implementors think it is that promising, then it probably isn't. At any rate, I don't think we should be trying to throw something this big into the standard at this late date, without more time to consider problems. Steven Sharp sharp@cadence.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Mon Nov 19 14:46:09 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 19 2007 - 14:46:20 PST