[Types-sig] typedefs (was: New syntax?)

Greg Stein gstein@lyra.org
Tue, 21 Dec 1999 11:46:46 -0800 (PST)

On Mon, 20 Dec 1999, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> I should finally work out my syntax proposal into something sensible
> because now I'm confusing myself. :) I do still think there's something
> interesting to be learned from the 'class instantiation' - 'typedef
> instantiation' and 'value assignment' - 'type assignment' analogy.

A summary would be good. I'm not sure at all where your position is
because you've been discussing from each position at different times.
Please create a bit of coherence :-)

> [snip]
> > In any case, I think using "def" inline to define a function typedecl is
> > fine. A typedef is merely used to create an alias, to clarify a later
> > declaration.
> Yes, but you basically have the same setup with current Python if you
> exclude Lambdas. A function definition is merely used to create an
> 'alias' for a piece of code, to clarify other pieces of code. If you

I disagree that a function def is merely an alias. It provides a new
namespace, parameter binding, and capabilities such as deferred execution.
I definitely don't see it as simply an alias.

> assume for the moment lambdas are bad, we may want to assume by analogy
> that inline defs are not a good idea either.

I don't think that argument follows.


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/