On 28 avr, 12:35, basti wrote:
> I believe this might be a big simplification and clarification of the
> current sustitution/matching logic. It might also be adviseable to
> factor part of the code out into some sort of "find" function which
> does the recursive looking for some pattern and might
On Apr 28, 5:09 pm, "Aaron S. Meurer" wrote:
> These are probably good ideas, though I am not to familiar with the code.
> Where does splitting subs into an algebraic subs and a strictly structural
> subs fit into all of this?
As I said above, it's my intend to replace the matching algorithm
i
