From: Sean O'D. <se...@ce...> - 2004-09-09 18:38:42
|
On Thursday 09 September 2004 09:44, T. Onoma wrote: > > But that's not how I use " ", I want the implicit specifying when I don't > put " ", but when I do it's because I mean !!str. > > In fact after reading your opposite view, I am more inclined then before to > insist that " " mean !!str -- we all know that's what we mean when we put > quotes! > > I suppose ?string is okay. But I am dubious that there will ever be a case > that specifies ?string as anything but !!str. But, hey, who knows. I guess > stranger things have happend :) I see that as implicit typing. Just like when a scalar made of all numerals is the criteria for determining the !!int type, quotes are a criteria for the !!str type. I think implicit typing should be done at ONE point, not partially once and then continued again later. a) If quotes mean !!str, then load all scalars equal, keep the quotes with the value and strip them off during the implicit typing phase. b) If quotes are a character escape mechanism, then strip them off during parsing and consider them !!str if, and only if, no other type is assigned to them during the implicit typing phase. I could go either way, but I prefer that quotes are only considered a character escape mechanism (b). My TRUE objection, though, the one thing I think is truly ugly, is that they are considered both and that there is a partial implicit typing phase where some scalars are tagged as !!str and then later, the rest of the implicit typing is done. I see no reason for a middle stage where scalars are plain or !!str and nothing else. Implicit typing is either done, or not done...I don't think there should be a halfway state. Sean O'Dell |