> Basically, ¢T is a close analog of &t, which is the variableish form > for "sub t". When used in a declaration, both of them introduce a > bare name as an alias into whatever scope the declaration is inserting > symbols, albeit with different syntactic slots. So just as > > my &t := { ... } > > introduces the possibility of > > t 1,2,3 > > so also a > > my ¢T := sometype(); > > introduces the possibility of > > my T $x;
I'm assuming that when you allow my ¢T := sometype(); you're also allowing my class T := sometype(); So, what happens when stupid me names a class "class" through symbol-table craziness? Rob