Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: RFC on support for user-defined "types"

From: ingo:2b1 at: 11-Jun-2002 19:40

Hi Joel, Joel Neely wrote: <..>
> somefunc: func [ > a [object! [invert]] > b [object! [memorize]] > ... > ][ > ...blah blah blah... > ... a/invert ... > ... b/memorize ... > ] > > to document/enforce that the first argument must possess an INVERT > attribute/method and the second must have a MEMORIZE attribute/method, > with the checking to be done by the interpreter at the/each point of > function invocation (e.g., as type checking is done now). > > Feedback, comments, etc. welcome as always! > > -jn-
That sounds very rebolious to me ... and a valuable addition, too! As much as I'd like "a facility that would allow me to define lexical syntax for a new data type, along with appropriate input/output formatting rules" (to quote from your other post), I don't believe that we'll see it (at least not before 4.0), but these object! tests seem to be doable (INARTE and all, af course). Kind regards, Ingo