Autrijus Tang wrote:

On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 07:13:53PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandla▀)" wrote:


Larry Wall wrote:


: Void context still exists and is not a form of singular or plural
: context. Perhaps this should be called nullar context, although void
: context works equally well for me and is not confusing because we have
: no Void type.


Nice, without Void we don't need the double headed
pseudo type lattice needed if we were to distinguish
subs that return no usefull---that is Any---value
from the ones that return no value at all.



Hrm. So if I have a sub that does nothing:

   sub Foo { }

Is it illegal to say this?

sub Foo returns Void { }



Can't we just say :

   Void =:= none(Any)

and get Void for near free?

-- Rod Adams

Reply via email to