Re: Weakness of "non-object" types

Show/hide message thread

Weakness of "non-object" types taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (04 Dec 2015 10:51 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types Takashi Kato (04 Dec 2015 12:28 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (04 Dec 2015 12:54 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types Takashi Kato (04 Dec 2015 14:27 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (04 Dec 2015 16:51 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types John Cowan (04 Dec 2015 15:12 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (04 Dec 2015 16:41 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types John Cowan (05 Dec 2015 07:15 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (05 Dec 2015 12:50 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types John Cowan (06 Dec 2015 04:41 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types taylanbayirli@xxxxxx (06 Dec 2015 10:21 UTC)

Re: Weakness of "non-object" types John Cowan 06 Dec 2015 04:41 UTC

Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer scripsit:

>     Booleans, characters, numbers, symbols, and the empty list are
>     encouraged, but not required, to never be stored weakly or
>     ephemerally.

s/encouraged/recommended/; it's an RFC 2119 magic word, equivalent to
"should", as "required" is equivalent to "must".

--
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        xxxxxx@ccil.org
Kill Gorgun!  Kill orc-folk!  No other words please Wild Men.  Drive away
bad air and darkness with bright iron!   --Ghan-buri-Ghan