On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 04:29, Majorinc, Kazimir wrote: > Another attractive possibility is to make &null behave as the weakest or > neutral element in every expression (as it is at least partly suggested by > name), so many frequently used idioms shouldn't need initialization: x:+=1 > as the most obvious one, but also m<:=!L, recently discussed put(x,1) and > perhaps many others.
You're saying that comparisons with &null should always succeed (as in the m <:= !L case), or that the behavior in x +:= 1 is to have &null coerced to 0 and in put(x,1) coerced to an empty list? I'm not sure of the definition of "behave" in the above... -- Steve Wampler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Unicon-group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
