Frédéric Bonnet wrote:
>  BTW, are you happy with the proposed syntax, besides agreeing or not on 
>  the whole concept of references? I.e.:
>  
>    $var  : regular value substitution
>    $&var : strong reference (early bound)
>    $@var : weak reference (late bound on access), semantically identical
>            to var name.
>  
>  After all, that was the point of the original message ;-)

Since you ask, personally, no. :-) Neither type of reference has
anything to do with reading the variable, and so should not use a $
character. After all, traditionally in Tcl variable names are not
decorated, and $ is just syntactic sugar. But for your experimentation,
you can ignore my prejudices; if I'm not contributing effort, I'm in the
peanut gallery.

This is quite apart from the whole question of references at all, which
are a can of worms. I'm assuming you won't *really* believe me on that
until you try it for yourself. :-)

Donal.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft 
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl-Core@[...].net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core