13 Oct
2005
13 Oct
'05
10:59 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 11:48:17AM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Andres Loeh <loeh@iai.uni-bonn.de> writes:
The way I understand the proposal, there are no FooBar dictionaries ever. John said that this can be translated by a source-to-source translation, so internally, a FooBar dictionary *is* a Foo and a Bar dictionary.
Ah yes, I was misled by the syntax, which suggested a superclass relationship, and therefore a combined dictionary. I see now the improved syntax proposal which makes the absence much clearer.
Yeah, that has confused several people already. I wish I used the new syntax in my original post, it really makes more sense. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈