-- On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 18:29:29 Joseph F. Ryan wrote: >As near as I can tell, the only problem with the nice flow of: > > A I<literal> is a piece of data. > A I<scalar> is a variable that holds a literal. > > A I<list> is a sequence of literals and scalars. > An I<array> is a variable that holds a list. > >is the "Rvalue-assign list", which takes the form of: > >($r1, $r2, $r3) = (1, 2, 3);
I don't see a problem here. The list on the right is still just value, unmodifiable. It is a list of rvalues. When you use a variable on the right hand side it is a rvalue. Similarly, a list of variables doesn't flatten to it's values - it is the list itself that it is immutable. It's individual members still retain asignibility in rvalue context. -Erik > >Well, what if an "Rvalue-assign list" is simply decoupled from >a normal "data list." The confusion would end. The concepts >themselves are separate, so why shouldn't the names be? "data >lists" become "The One True List Type", and "Rvalue-assign lists" >become something like "Rvalue sequences" (or a catchier name). >Peace would reign on earth, or at least p6-lang and p6-doc. > >(I hope I'm not missing something obvious here, at any rate :) > > >Joseph F. Ryan >ryan.311@osu > > ____________________________________________________________ Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus
