I see, thanks. Op 3 aug. 2017 23:01 schreef "Michael Kay" <m...@saxonica.com>:
> > > > Anonymous functions would've been quite nice, but could your example > only be used for a single argument? > > Yes. I think that's such a common case that it's worth having special > syntax for, particularly as we already have "." as a symbol representing an > anonymous variable, so we get a nice combination of concepts. > > (We do of course have syntax for the more general case already: it's just > a bit verbose.) > > But of course, in the WG we would spend months discussing alternatives and > might well come up with something better... > > Michael Kay > Saxonica
_______________________________________________ talk@x-query.com http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
