Tavin Cole <tavin at mailandnews.com> writes: > I think Adam's syntax could use some improvements, but overall I > like it as it's very sensibly organized. It's useful to think of > the requests in terms of function calls even if you don't end up > putting parentheses in the URI.
The problem with thinking of keys in terms of function calls is that in order to spec it out fully, we'd have to invent a type system. The return types on AGL's "functions" weren't specified in his email, but they did exist -- the DBR() function, for example, has a return type that isn't the same as that of either of the parameters taken by the CHK() function. A more limited approach would save us all the trouble of embedding type checkers in our freenet URI parsers. -S _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
