[r-t] Asymmetric Doubles

[Graham John]

Philip wrote:

> So Arlesey Bob could just as well be described as &-16-16-16, 1256).
> Now, under Ted's idea, a 14 leadend call *in the same method* would now be
described as a single.
> So Ted's definition means that the same call at the leadend in the same
method
> is called different things.  Hmmmmm indeed.

I don't quote follow this. If you replace pn16 by 14, yes it is a bob. If
you replace 1256 by 14, it is a single. But these aren't the same call. The
same call would be 1456 instead of 1256, which again would be a bob.

Graham