Damian Conway wrote: > > More and more I lean towards a scalar-only reduce. Yep! > Simpler semantics and you can always ref a L(OL(OL(OL...etc.))) if you need > multidimensionals. Combined with highlander variables, and there ceases to be a problem. -- John Porter
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduc... John Porter
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Graham Barr
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Jeremy Howard
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Glenn Linderman
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce John Porter
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Graham Barr
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Adam Krolnik
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduce Jeremy Howard
- Re: RFC 76 (v1) Builtin: reduc... Bart Lateur