On Apr 13, 2008, at 1:28 , John M. Dlugosz wrote:
I don't like the assignments of 'returns' and 'of'. I think it is easily confused. I've written

foo (Int $x)
returns Int

I think the main problem here is that "of" is there only for completeness; one would normally say

our Int sub foo (Int $x)

that is, "of" only exists to let you put the type afterward with other traits. Thus "returns" should stand out as something unusual. If the Synopsis leads you to think "of" is the correct way to declare an outer/contract type, it should probably be clarified.

Beyond that, yes it's somewhat confusing. But I'm not sure there's a way to specify the difference that (a) meets the Huffman-coding design constraint and (b) isn't *really* klunky ("of" is rather klunky as is, tbh). @Larry? (And yes, I'm aware it's been discussed before, see archive link in previous msg :)

brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university    KF8NH

Reply via email to