Martin Rubey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| > | Sure there is no semicolon, but I don't understand. (Unfortunately, I
| > | can only speak of Aldor...). Cannot
| > |
| > | {1}
| >
| > The point is that if the contained single expression is all you have,
| > there is no point in putting in a brace. If you would like to group
| > statements, then group statement*S*, and you'll be fine.
|
| 1) It could happen that the code inside the brace might be computer generated.
A computer generated code has the luxury of introducing a temporary to
hold the single expressions. And most computer generated codes are
not meant for human consumption. I'll prefer to handle well the
common cases, while making the harder cases possible.
| For that, it, is nicer to have "uniform" semantics.
|
| 2) I find
|
| [{{x := f i; x+x^2+x^3}} for i in 1..10]
|
| as notation for a list of sets confusing.
|
| 3) What would {1,2,3} stand for:
As documented in Jenks&Sutor, it stands fos a Set PositiveInteger with
3 elements.
-- Gaby
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
open-axiom-devel mailing list
open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
