Re: RFC 263 (v1) Add null() keyword and fundamental data type

[Glenn Linderman]

Russ Allbery wrote:

> Why on earth would you want to do this in real code?

I wouldn't, of course.  This is just a demonstration that I want both
semantics available concurrently.

> I don't believe you actually need both semantics active at the same time;

I do.  Need might be a slightly stronger word than necessary, but "want" and
"convenience" sure come strongly to mind... the proposals to switch from one
set of semantics to another just don't cut it for ease of use.

> it might take really minor rewording of the code (initialize to 0 instead
> of undef for counters, etc.), but I'm very unconvinced that you need both
> concepts active at the same time.

--
Glenn
=====
Even if you're on the right track,
you'll get run over if you just sit there.
                       -- Will Rogers





____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________
Download Now     http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Request a CDROM  1-800-333-3633
___________________________________________________________