Return-Path: Delivery-Date: Received: from ted.cs.uidaho.edu (no rfc931) by swan.cl.cam.ac.uk with SMTP (PP-6.4); Fri, 22 Jan 1993 10:02:48 +0000 Received: by ted.cs.uidaho.edu (16.6/1.34) id AA21656; Fri, 22 Jan 93 01:46:41 -0800 Sender: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted Errors-To: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted Precedence: bulk Received: from ganymede.inmos.co.uk by ted.cs.uidaho.edu (16.6/1.34) id AA21651; Fri, 22 Jan 93 01:46:31 -0800 Received: from frogland.inmos.co.uk by ganymede.inmos.co.uk; Fri, 22 Jan 93 09:45:19 GMT From: David Shepherd Message-Id: <2489.9301220945@frogland.inmos.co.uk> Subject: Re: Conversion from HOL88 to HOL90 To: info-hol@edu.uidaho.cs.ted (info-hol mailing list) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 09:45:43 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <9301212332.AA03970@lara.Eng.Sun.COM> from "Paul Loewenstein" at Jan 21, 93 03:32:32 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 756 Paul Loewenstein has said: > Converting from HOL88v1.x can be less straightforward, because of the > different behaviour of the resolution tactics. Presumably this is > also a problem upgrading to HOL88v2.x. I think the problems occur for hol88 v1.11 and earlier - v1.12 had the new resolution schem in it - the 1.11->1.12 change was a hassle because of this (and this sort of put be off another change to v2 until I had plenty of time :-) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- david shepherd: des@inmos.co.uk tel: 0454-616616 x 625 inmos ltd, 1000 aztec west, almondsbury, bristol, bs12 4sq Life doesn't imitate art, it imitates bad television - Husbands and Wives