> Yes, been there. Somehow it felt wrong. I had a set of transforms for > building binary expression trees, and another for building parenthesised > expressions. Then I'd call the binary expression transform again to weld > together the parens expressions that it couldn't deal with the first > time around. Then I refactored my binary class to know about parentheses > (and switching to a subtree() match), and the whole thing collapsed into > a nice compact ball of loveliness. > > Now I do this: (snip) (snip)
Oh! You certainly know which end of Transformations is pointy - this looks neat! You can now forget I by the wayd that... k
