use Perl

Patrick:
        - customer project deadlines keep jumping and scopes keep creeping
        - the deadline is next Wednesday
        - I should be done then
        - did send Allison an e-mail about the operator precedence parser

Jesse:
        - you'll go into the Perl 6 parser then?

Patrick:
        - yes
        - maybe adding some features to PGE driven by parser demands

Larry:
        - also have a work deadline
        - but sneaked in a synopsis change from "till" to "ff"
        - threw some conjectural stuff in S12 to bless ^ as a shorthand for .meta

Luke:
        - I think it's important to keep the difference between a type and a
            package concrete
        - I thought ^ was for types
        - I'll see what I make of your changes and *then* whine

Jesse:
        - P5 to P5 is still about 95%?

Larry:
        - haven't done anything on that in the last week

Luke:
        - enjoying my processor arch class
        - might dive into Parrot to apply some of my knowledge in a while
        - otherwise working on an algorithm and paper to dispatch pure
            multimethods as fast as possible
        - can also incorporate compile-time information if it's available
        - getting those two things at once is pretty hard
        - the algorithm is still in progress
        - I can build a decision tree that dispatches to the right multi-method
            provably with as few checks as possible
        - you can rule out some candidates based on compile-time information
        - you can use a bit of the theory that falls out of that to do type
            inference
        - that's probably a couple of weeks away
        - it might be worth a senior thesis

Allison:
        - Punie almost does simple if statements
        - meeting with Chip in a bit
        - I'll work on operators next
        - it looks like Patrick's solution might fix my problem
        - have about five or six people reviewing AL 2.0
        - don't know if I'll get any comments
        - have one more week on it

Jesse:
        - I asked to have that list created
        - I haven't seen anything yet
        - Chip answered some of Leo's questions on Monday

Luke:
        - thinking about overriding stuff in classes
        - attributes that have a constant value through the lifetime of an object
            are different beasts from attributes that can change
        - I'm searching for a way to make that distinction without imposing
            horrible cognitive or finger blocks on people

Larry:
        - like our readonly versus contant distinction?
        - on ordinary variables
        - bound in a constant way
        - but not a constant
        - different iterations of this function may have a different value
        - can't optimize it away in that sense

Luke:
        - the fact that attributes aren't read-only inside of an object causes
            problems with inheritance
        - that distinction may be nice to have if it works cognitively

c:
        - is that an implementation detail not exposable?

Luke:
        - more about the intent of its use rather than its actual use