On Jul 29, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Eduardo Cavazos wrote: > I'm not sure about what that one-shot syntax would be however. > Notice that > this isn't bad looking and it involves no new words: > > IN: sequences : nth ( :integer :frob -- obj ) ... ; > > The only issue is having to switch back to the original vocabulary.
That's a great point, Ed. Looking at that line of code I'd say a separate EXTEND: word wasn't really necessary. -Joe ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
