Syntax Again

[Rémi Forax]

Le 10/02/2010 15:41, Fredrik Öhrström a écrit :
> Somehow I think that no official looking body has explicitly rejected
> the BGGA syntax. It has more sort of been left in limbo.
>
> Personally I consider it important to easily discern between a Type and
> a piece of code.
> Thus the creation of a closure is excellent in the BGGA proposal, and it
> looks like
> a bit of code, which is perfect since an important purpose of BGGA is
> control abstraction.
>
> However the type holding on to the closure also looks like a piece of
> code, this is not so good.
> Integers (1234) do not look like "int". The closure type need not look
> like the actual closure
> creation body.
>
> //Fredrik
>    

+1

Rémi