Syntax checking

>Wow - this one had me digging through that crap code I wrote for all
>this syntax nonsense and I needed to look at the logic again as to why
>this is okay. 

Please check.  The reason I concern about it is that I am not sure the tools 
e.g. peval,etc. would take it well.    

>ALL is valid syntax as is can infact we a community
>(ugly I know) but true in the definition. 

I have some difficulties to parse this.  Would you explain?

						--Jessica 




-------- Logged at  Thu May 18 19:34:22 MET DST 1995  ---------