From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: Allegro compilation warnings Date: 2000/10/20 Message-ID: <3180995380502819@naggum.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 683733043 References: <3180376670416509@naggum.net> <3180475124104589@naggum.net> <3180723380733118@naggum.net> mail-copies-to: never Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 972034861 20098 195.0.192.66 (20 Oct 2000 09:41:01 GMT) Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 800 35477; gsm: +47 93 256 360; fax: +47 93 270 868; http://naggum.no; http://naggum.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.7 Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Oct 2000 09:41:01 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * Paolo Amoroso | I understand (A) and (C), but I fail to get the difference--if any--between | (B) and its implicit definition as a sort of "set complement" of (A) and | (C). Could you elaborate on this? The purpose of a scope (B) is to make it easier on those of us who don't think productively in terms of "the whole entire universe of all possible positions, actions, plans, desires, and desiderata, except what I said in (A)". Usually, it is important to point out some of the most important issues that you do not want to address in order that you can practically and productively exclude discussions without having to enter another discussion to determine whether they are part of the negated universe of possibilities. Why did this need elaboration? Never been to a standards committee? :) #:Erik -- I agree with everything you say, but I would attack to death your right to say it. -- Tom Stoppard