- Original Message -
From: "Jaroslaw Kowalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "! nant"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] Implicit conversions in expressions
> We (I added this recently) currently also allow an implicit conversion of
> null to a (empty) string, which is useful for functions that return
> reference types (eg. framework::get-runtime-engine()). Should we keep
this,
> or do you want to add a "is-null()" function (in what namespace) and a
>
- Original Message -
From: "Jaroslaw Kowalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "! nant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 12:08 AM
Subject: [nant-dev] Implicit conversions in expressions
> Hi!
>
> We currently have a problem w
Hi!
We currently have a problem where implicit conversions allowed in NAnt
expressions aren't too intuitive (sometimes they are ambiguous) and we
should do something about it.
I've analyzed the sources and we have the following conversions:
c1) when at least one argument to a '+' operator is a s
