Re: [Scheme-reports] Formal comment: The denotational semantics will@ccs.neu.edu (07 Jul 2012 16:13 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Formal comment: The denotational semantics Perry E. Metzger (07 Jul 2012 21:18 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Formal comment: The denotational semantics John Cowan (07 Jul 2012 22:05 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] Formal comment: The denotational semantics John Cowan 07 Jul 2012 22:04 UTC

Perry E. Metzger scripsit:

> As a general process question: could WG1 vote in the "English" part
> of the spec and later amend it with a completed formal semantics
> (possibly with some minor patches to deal with ambiguities
> discovered in the course of creating them)? The formal semantics might
> take a while, but it would be a shame not to have them.

Yes, I agree; however, the completed formal semantics can be issued
as a separate document by a separate WG, with no need for amendment.
Patches we might need, though I hope not.

--
Income tax, if I may be pardoned for saying so,         John Cowan
is a tax on income.  --Lord Macnaghten (1901)           cowan@ccil.org

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