the next RNRS meeting

[mkatz@garlic.stanford.edu (Morris Katz)]

   Posted-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 90 14:29:43 EST
   From: ramsdell@linus.mitre.org
   Date: Thu, 15 Feb 90 14:29:43 EST

   >> 2)  I continue to strongly believe in the desirability of a disjoint type for
   >> '() in Scheme and reserve the write to restart this argument at the next RNRS
   >> meeting.

   Given Jinx's clear statements, I am not sure about the merits of
   restarting this argument at the next RNRS meeting.  I think there are
   other issues that could be profitably discussed.  The two topics I
   have in mind are multiple value returns and records.  

Unfortunately, a similar argument could be made that discussing these topics is
also pointless because of strong opinions on these issues as well.  Personally,
I would like to discuss all 3 of the issues presented in the future.

   I propose that
   we schedule a meeting for some time this year.  I suggest the next RNRS
   meeting be held in White Plains, NY at the SIGPLAN'90 conference in
   late June.

What percentage of the Scheme community is planning on attending this
conference?  I know that I personally will NOT be attending.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morry Katz
katz@cs.stanford.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------