On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Geoffrey Irving <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What would be the syntax for appending a definition to the current scope?
>
> It's mainly a keyword distinction, I think. In BitC, for example, all
> type definitions append to current top level scope (restricted to top
> level). DEFINE appends to current scope, and LET introduces and
> encloses a nested scope.
>
> The difference is mainly one of keyword selection (perhaps "def" vs.
> "let"). I'm hopefully that we can normalize the two forms a bit as we
> re-syntax.
Actually, do we need a keyword for adding a variable to the current
scope at all? I.e., what about
x = 3;
The obvious problem with this is that it overlaps with assignment,
which might make it a non-starter. That said, if I had to make I
choice I'd prefer to make assignment more verbose (and more visually
obvious) than creating a new variable.
Geoffrey
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
