On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 13:23 -0700, Erick Tryzelaar wrote:
> On 9/18/07, skaller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > you can see the parser is using it .. :)
>
> Hey! that's cheatin!
For my next trick .. it would be nice if you could do
struct X { int a; int b; };
val x = X { a=1; b=2; };
or at least:
val x = struct X { a=1; b=2; };
or perhaps:
val x = X : a(1), b(2) {};
or something. At present structs get a tuple constructor.
A struct is really a lightweight class .. and also a tuple
with named components and also a record .. need to unify
something there ..
BTW: I think SML has records but not really tuples, instead
a.member // named component
a.1 // actually 1 is just the name
so that
(1,2,3)
is just shorthand for
(.1=1, .2=2, .3=3)
--
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Felix-language mailing list
Felix-language@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/felix-language
