Hi, please configure your e-mail client to use "> " (greater-than, space) for quoting, if possible. It currently uses ">" (greater-than).
TSa skribis 2005-09-26 13:43 (+0200): > >>Why not define .chars like this: > >> Context Return value > >> item amount of units > >> list units themselves > I still have my objections to this outside-in flow of type > information. Can you explain please what "outside-in" means to you? > >I still think this. They certainly LOOK symmetric. > But with respect to what are .elems and .chars symmetric? > Do you mean they are just two five elems err chars long names > for the identical concept? They are both plural, and the word used is used to describe a fundamental building piece of the greater whole: an array has elements, a string has characters. It has nothing to do with both elems and chars being 5 letters. > > The difference with @foo without .elems would then be non-Num item > > context: item @foo returns [EMAIL PROTECTED], but item @foo.elems returns > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ... > but I don't follow how you manage to mix these concepts and > come up with 'non-Num item context'. non-Num item context is item context that isn't specifically numeric. Bare @foo in non-Num context returns a reference, @foo.elems in non-Num context returns the number of elements. In Num context, both return the number of elements. > BTW, does everybody expect more than one prefix numerifyer beeing > redundant or is there an idea of (+ (+ @foo)) beeing modelled It's providing context to something that was already providing context. A bit redundant indeed. Juerd -- http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html
