On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 02:50:23PM -0800, Jon Lang wrote:
> Darren Duncan wrote:
> > Now, with some basic types, I know how to do it, examples:
> > Bool # Bool::True
> Please forgive my ignorance; but are there any cases where
> 'Bool::True' can be spelled more concisely as 'True'? Otherwise, this
> approach seems awfully cluttered.
Nearly all enum-like things can be spelled without their namespace
qualifier, as long as they're unambiguous.
So yes, Bool::True can be spelled 'True' as long as there's not
some other form of 'True' floating around.