On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 10:18:47AM +0300, Markus Laire wrote: : As S09 says that: : : At the statement level, a semicolon terminates the current : expression. Within any kind of bracketing construct, semicolon : notionally produces a list of lists, the interpretation of which : depends on the context. Such a semicolon list always provides list : context to each of its sublists. The following two constructs are : structurally indistinguishable: : : (0..10; 1,2,4; 3) : ([0..10], [1,2,3,4], [3])
By the way, S09 is wrong there. Semicolon no longer forces retroactive extra-listhood unless the context it's bound to specifically requests it. : If not, how then would I use hyper-reduction ops like [>>+^=<<] with : several arrays? : : i.e. How do I write : : @a >>+^=<< @b >>+^=<< @c : : using the [>>+^=<<] op? Possibly [>>...<<] always supplies "[EMAIL PROTECTED] is context(Scalar)", since hypers are essentially scalar context on both sides, and we do have the "is context(Scalar)" concept floating around vaguely. Though in this case it almost feels more like a macro argument than a scalar. Larry
