Binding forms that introduce inner scopes should be distinct from
those that merely append definitions to the current scope. I do
understand that appending actually does introduce a new scope. The
issue is that in one type of form the scopes end in the same place,
where in the other they do not.
I'm currently inclined to favor a syntax very similar to OCaml:
let BINDING { and BINDING } in EXPR end
and other forms similarly.
Strong objections or alternatives?
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
