claudio@ethz.UUCP (Claudio Nieder) (11/18/86)
My comments to the report released by the Modula II working group:
WG106: I support (i).
WG113: But does that allow one-pass compilers to be 'standard compilers'?
The same question arises when you consider the scope rules.
PIM-3 allows you to write:
PROCEDURE p;
BEGIN
i:=1;
END p;
VAR i: INTEGER;
If the Modula standard says this is ok, then there will be no
one-pass compiler which can be compatible to the standard.
WG118: MIN, MAX not for REAL? Why?
WG119: I support to use only SIZE for types and variables.
WG084: Why? Are there any cases where you define something in a definition
module which you don't want to export? Show me an example!
--
claudio
(* ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I'm not working for ETH-Zurich! I'm just a CS student.
E-Mail: UUCP: claudio@ethz.uucp
BITNET: K538912@CZHRZU1A
Mail: Claudio Nieder, Kanalweg 1, CH-8610 Uster, Switzerland.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- *)