> Basically, ¢T is a close analog of &t, which is the variableish form
> for "sub t". When used in a declaration, both of them introduce a
> bare name as an alias into whatever scope the declaration is inserting
> symbols, albeit with different syntactic slots. So just as
>
> my &t := { ... }
>
> introduces the possibility of
>
> t 1,2,3
>
> so also a
>
> my ¢T := sometype();
>
> introduces the possibility of
>
> my T $x;
I'm assuming that when you allow
my ¢T := sometype();
you're also allowing
my class T := sometype();
So, what happens when stupid me names a class "class" through
symbol-table craziness?
Rob
