On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Klaas-Jan Stol wrote: > >> >>>>> This is another one of those muddy cases in PIR where words conflict >>>> when >>>> they shouldn't. I can't think of any way that it's actually useful to >>>> have a >>>> variable named 'add' prevent you from using the opcode 'add'. >>>> >>> >> .. but of course, I don't want to exclude it. If it is really felt that >> these 'muddy' cases should be resolved, it shouldn't be too hard to >> implement (I tried some 30 min. hacking in pirc, and results seemed >> promising). >> > > Desirable, but not urgent. > > Allison ok. This must make the following syntax rule illegal: target = null because if "null" is declared as a .local, you can't know whether you want to nullify target, or want to set target's value to that of the .local variable "null". I take it this is no problem; just stick to null target if you actually want to set target to 0/null. kjs
