On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 10:33 -0400, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: > Given an application of the form > > (a.x [args])
O'Caml uses a#x for method calls, and it looks OK. I believe that could be compatible with BitC's current syntax. Question: would such a method call notation be somewhat disturbing as it suggests the first argument is somehow privileged? Thanks. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
