On Apr 13, 2008, at 1:28 , John M. Dlugosz wrote:
I don't like the assignments of 'returns' and 'of'. I think it is
easily confused. I've written
foo (Int $x)
returns Int
I think the main problem here is that "of" is there only for
completeness; one would normally say
our Int sub foo (Int $x)
that is, "of" only exists to let you put the type afterward with
other traits. Thus "returns" should stand out as something unusual.
If the Synopsis leads you to think "of" is the correct way to declare
an outer/contract type, it should probably be clarified.
Beyond that, yes it's somewhat confusing. But I'm not sure there's a
way to specify the difference that (a) meets the Huffman-coding
design constraint and (b) isn't *really* klunky ("of" is rather
klunky as is, tbh). @Larry? (And yes, I'm aware it's been discussed
before, see archive link in previous msg :)
--
brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH
