[REBOL] Re: Updates to hof script
From: g:santilli:tiscalinet:it at: 16-Nov-2002 21:19
Hi Jan,
On Saturday, November 16, 2002, 8:23:15 PM, you wrote:
JS> But one must execute some caution because [integer! string!]
JS> in a function definition would represent a set of choices, rather than
JS> a Cartesian product.
Indeed; and that could be expressed in PARSE notation as
[integer! | string!]
JS> I am still not convinced that the
JS> [some [into [integer! string!]]]
JS> is that much readable.
Once you are familiar with PARSE, it is. I think that it is better
having as few different notations as possible, so that people have
less things to learn; since PARSE is already in, and a REBOL
programmer is supposed to know it to some extent, I assume such a
notation would look much more familiar to him/her.
JS> Think about those long signatures.
Indeed, that is likely to be a problem. Short or readable, pick
one. (As Joel would say. ;-)
Of course, mine is just an idea; maybe it can just be useful to
make you think of something better. :-)
Spending all my cents today,
Gabriele.
--
Gabriele Santilli <[g--santilli--tiscalinet--it]> -- REBOL Programmer
Amigan -- AGI L'Aquila -- REB: http://web.tiscali.it/rebol/index.r
