develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from August 2000

Re: RFCs: two proposals for change

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Tim Bunce
August 4, 2000 08:07
Re: RFCs: two proposals for change
Message ID:
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 01:08:16AM -0700, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> ...
> > I think the confusion is with what Internet RFCs are, not what perl's RFCs 
> > are. Many of them are proposals, or working drafts. The big difference is 
> > that internet RFCs have code behind them (usually), while ours precede code 
> > writing.
> Yes yes! I agree very much.
> Some internet RFC's is not even that close to actual code or
> standards. Some of them are even jokes.



                    And while he stood, in uffish thought,
                         The ARPANET, with IMPish bent,
                    Sent packets through conditioned lines,
                         And checked them as they went,


   The introduction of body monitors as IPv9 addresseable units injected
   into the blood stream has been rated as inconclusive. Whilst being
   able to have devices lodged in the heart, kidneys, brain, etc.,
   sending out SNMPv9 trap messages at critical events has been a useful
   monitoring tool for doctors, the use of the blood stream as both a
   delivery and a communication highway, has been problematic.


   This memo describes a protocol suite which supports an infinite
   number of monkeys that sit at an infinite number of typewriters in
   order to determine when they have either produced the entire works of
   William Shakespeare or a good television show.  The suite includes
   communications and control protocols for monkeys and the
   organizations that interact with them.

Ask, please don't post such diversionary material, I've got work to do!

Umm, then again, maybe that last one is revelant to Perl6 development ;-)


Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About