RE: Email Ballot due June 25th

Hi Dave,

4145 YES

4129 NO Because still should try to see if precedence will work, and because there is no example of integer_expression syntax and no description of it.

4127 NO Because too much discussion in the Mantis comments after proposal to consider this resolved.

4126 YES

3940 NO Because I'd like confirmed that "regardless of whether method triggered or method matched is applied to the instance of the sequence" needn't mention "property", because "across an instance of a property or a sequence" should be "across an instance of a sequence or property" for parallel construction with "a sequence or property" in the following sentence, and because the section number is out-of-date with draft 5.
 
3525 NO Because I'd like to know how many existing designs would be broken by the backward incompatibility

2840 YES
Received on Fri Jun 22 22:13:18 2012