Re: function signature type checking

• To: info-dylan@ai.mit.edu
• Subject: Re: function signature type checking
• From: Andreas Bogk <andreas@andreas.org>
• Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:45:01 -0500 (EST)
• References: <uy9kto2dr.fsf@telus.net>
• Sender: andreas@teonanacatl.andreas.org
• User-Agent: Gnus/5.0806 (Gnus v5.8.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Civil Service)
• Xref: traf.lcs.mit.edu comp.lang.dylan:13790

Ray Blaak <blaak@telus.net> writes:

> It seems that the right way is to declare the type of the parameter or result
> to be <function>.
> Is there a way to further specialize this?

No, there isn't.

I think it could be added to the language quite easily using
limited(<function>, ...). The question is whether it would be worth
the trouble.

Andreas

-- 
"In my eyes it is never a crime to steal knowledge. It is a good
theft. The pirate of knowledge is a good pirate."
                                                       (Michel Serres)

• Re: function signature type checking
• From: Kim Barrett <kab@camellia.org>

• function signature type checking
• From: Ray Blaak <blaak@telus.net>

• Prev: Re: function signature type checking
• Next: function signature type checking
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread