>> clueless question: can they be optional in the language? so that it is >> pay-as-you-go? > > Not really, because they require syntactic support. The issue isn't > compile time or computational complexity of analysis. The issue is the > need for syntax cruft.
not sure i explained myself well :-) or i'm mis-interpreting your note. i was meaning a nuance about when there is a "need for syntax cruft": if you could make the use of manually written effect annotations in the code optional for the programmer (either leaving it "untyped" or somehow doing some inference), then they don't have to deal with the cruft unless they are motivated to by the payback. (but then Swaroop was saying library developers would probably suffer.) sincerely. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list bitc-dev@coyotos.org http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
