xxxxxx@freenetproject.org wrote:
> Yes, [*-functions] are supposed to be polymorphic.  This is stated at
> the end of the text in the Procedures section:
>
>     Encountering * as a function argument indicates that the argument
>     must be a collection of the type the function is defined for, or
>     any sub-type.

OK, I thought that's what it meant.

Regarding my confusion about VALUES returns:

> I think the current form is sufficient, but I'll add a sentence
> clarifiying that multiple items on the right of => imply the return of
> multiple values.

That would be sufficient. Thanks!
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd