Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!decvax!dartvax!waltervj
From: waltervj@dartvax.UUCP (walter jeffries)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups
Subject: Re: Making binary groups obsolete (was Re:Are binary groups necessary?)
Message-ID: <6793@dartvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-Jul-87 11:30:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.6793
Posted: Thu Jul 30 11:30:49 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Aug-87 15:11:56 EDT
References: <266@brandx.rutgers.edu> <8225@utzoo.UUCP> <272@brandx.rutgers.edu> <153@hobbes.UUCP> <303@brandx.rutgers.edu>
Reply-To: waltervj@dartvax.UUCP (walter jeffries)
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Lines: 17
Xref: mnetor news.admin:769 news.groups:1304

In article <303@brandx.rutgers.edu> webber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber) writes:
>  :     <--- MUCH GIBBERISH ABOUT HOW WE SHOULD DO IT HIS WAY.
>So, the bottom line is I will trade you a [C] compiler for a set of groups
>that will hopefully obsolete the binary groups.  WHAT DO YOU SAY????
>

Do I understand this correctly????
Why the f*** do you think you have the right to make everybody else write
code in some archaic minimal version of C that you happen to like?!?
Think, for a moment.  What if I want to write in LISP, or some other language.
What you are proposing will censor me and anyone else who writes in anything
incompatible to your 'nice little C compiler'.  Furthermore you are cutting of
all of the previously compiled material!

So, the bottom line is that I think your suggestion rots.  WHAT DO YOU SAY????

-Waltervj