Sep 27 meeting notes
waldemar at google.com
Fri Sep 30 19:23:21 PDT 2011
On 09/30/2011 06:51 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2011, at 3:34 AM, Waldemar Horwat wrote:
>> On 09/30/2011 05:07 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>>>> On 09/30/2011 04:37 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>>>>> since we haven't come up with a way to do 2 and 5 that works,
>>> We can add these later ...
>> Those two statements you made are in direct contradiction.
> No, not logically -- you would have to assume something more, like for instance:
>> If there were a way to do it that's satisfactory to the group, we would have found it by now.
> and I didn't make this third statement. It's your assumption.
So you're saying we should keep looking?
I feel like you're playing word games. Being satisfactory to the group is an obvious and implied requirement.
There are lots of ways to do classes that satisfy all of 2-5. However, it doesn't matter if those exist if those solutions are not acceptable to the group.
You haven't demonstrated any approach which "we can add later" that would be acceptable to the group. On the contrary, experience from the past two meetings suggests that it does not exist.
More information about the es-discuss