[Swan-dev] a better unified proposal matcher

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| 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.