On Monday, June 16, 2003, at 11:49 AM, Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Or, if we have "output rules" just like we have "input rules", could something quite complex be expressed simply as:
"You have <$x as MoneyFormat>"
having previously defined your MoneyFormat "formatting rule" in some other location?
"You have <MoneyFormat($x)>", no?
Yeah. Though I'd actually hope both forms were acceptable, personally. I really like the visual karma of the first, representing a "type or format conversion", more than the second, representing the "creation of a formatted object" -- though in practice the two notions are of course identical. :-)
MikeL
