Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot xacc.ide@gmail.com (16 May 2014 21:01 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot John Cowan (18 May 2014 08:08 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot John Cowan (18 May 2014 17:28 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Bakul Shah (18 May 2014 18:01 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Bakul Shah 18 May 2014 17:57 UTC


> On May 18, 2014, at 9:39 AM, Bear <bear@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> I don't think anybody cares too deeply what name we use;
> but we care deeply that there should be a known, portable
> name.  It's rather like passing a law that says drive on
> the left/right side of the road; either way works, but the
> law must be passed anyway because it's something that the
> drivers must agree on and it affects the design of the
> vehicles' control

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports