Path: news.daimi.aau.dk!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!Cabal.CESspool!bofh.vszbr.cz!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news.rhrz.uni-bonn.de!news.chemietechnik.uni-dortmund.de!Uni-Dortmund.DE!not-for-mail From: Mark Nowiasz Newsgroups: comp.lang.beta Subject: Inconsistency in the Mjoelner implementation? Date: 13 Feb 1998 13:23:22 GMT Organization: University of Dortmund Lines: 33 Sender: Mark Nowiasz; ; Message-ID: <6c1hga$39h@nx2.HRZ.Uni-Dortmund.DE> NNTP-Posting-Host: sx2.hrz.uni-dortmund.de User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980105 (UNIX) (SunOS/5.5.1 (sun4u)) Xref: news.daimi.aau.dk comp.lang.beta:11395 Hi, I've got a question concerning BETA and the Mjoelner BETA compiler. IMHO the Mjoelner BETA system allows / encourages something which is in my a opinion inconsistens with a BETA idea. Take a look at this pattern: (# do_something : (# ... #); { a procedural pattern } do 5 -> do_something; #); According to the book (Madsen et al) the correct way to invoke a procedural pattern is by generating an instance of the procedural pattern, in this case 5 -> &do_something, which is IMHO logical. My question is now: what does 5 -> do_something actually do? If I might draw an anolgue to C++, this would mean that I evoke a method of a class before generating an object of this class, which is IMHO utter nonsense. So, what does 5 -> do_something; really do? If it's a synonym for 5 -> &do_something; then it's a grave breach in the logic of BETA.. Regards, Mark -- |\ _,,,---,,_ Mark Nowiasz (buckaroo@blackbox.free.de) /,.-'' -. ;-;;,_ PGP-Key available at keyservers/request. |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( '-' http://www.free.de/~buckaroo/ '---''(_/--' -'\_) IRC: Buckaroo | Voice: +49 177 2190385