[Swan-dev] a better unified proposal matcher

D. Hugh Redelmeier hugh at mimosa.com
Thu Feb 26 23:04:33 EET 2015

| From: Andrew Cagney <andrew.cagney at gmail.com>

| I should also disclose a conflict of interest.  I'm less interested in
| a better proposal matcher, and more interested in a unified proposal
| matcher (so I can match ESP with D-H for instance).

I don't understand what you mean by "unified proposal matcher".

The first thought was: handles v1 and v2.  I don't think you mean
that.  I hope you don't mean that.  I imagine that we're best off
desentangling v1 and v2.

Then I read what your parenthetcal remark.  Why would you want to
match ESP with DH?  How could they ever match?  I'm pretty sure that
I'm missing something.

More information about the Swan-dev mailing list