=> 5/30/00 5:23:25 PM EDT, sr at evolgo.de =>
<< I think the problem is clear: "To normalize or not to normalize!">>

Cute. However, it appears with new LargeIntegers package that normalize is 
essential (in some cases), where with old LargePositiveIntegers it was 
optional (in some cases).

<<I'm not motivated to make a full rework of the DSA stuff and would like to 
hear John's opinion about this topic... >>

It sounds like John Maloney understands the problem (see full text of 
following E-mail), and was taking certain liberties with LargePositiveInteger 
for performance reasons.

=> 5/30/00 7:18:42 PM EDT, John.Maloney at disney.com =>
<< Incidentally, I'm about to vanish for a six week vacation in Europe. I'm 
afraid I won't be able to do much about this myself before I go. >>

Stephan and John,

John's description seems quite consistent with Stephan's. So unless someone 
is willing to submit a temporary fix as a standard fileIn for the DSA code 
(perhaps a performance hit by a factor of 2 is good enough for six weeks), I 
would say that it's broken and should not be used until John gets back. Other 
opinions?

One more fox out of one more rabbit hole :-),
Jerry.
____________________________

Jerry L. Archibald
systemObjectivesIncorporated
____________________________