Some grammar nits I'd like to pick...
Alarmingly, the Capture semantics are starting to make perfect sense
to me now..
On Apr 15, 2006, at 16:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
======================================================================
========
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod (original)
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod Sat Apr 15 06:17:49 2006
+Like C<List> objects, C<Capture> objects are immutable in the
abstract, but
+evaluates its arguments lazily. Before everything inside a
C<Capture> are
fully evaluated (which happens at compile time when all the
arguments are
constants), the eventual value may well be unknown. All we know
is that is
that we have the promise to make the bits of it immutable as they
become known.
Tense disagreements:
"capture objects ... evaluates its arguments"
"Before everything ... are fully evaluated"
"is that" repeated twice
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
======================================================================
========
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod (original)
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod Sat Apr 15 06:17:49 2006
-Arguments that correspond to named parameters are evaluated in scalar
+Capture that correspond to named parameters are evaluated in scalar
context. They can only be passed by name, so it doesn't matter what
I think that was "arguments" the word, not C<Arguments> the object.
