Perl is worse!

[William Tanksley]

On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 21:10:51 GMT, Steve Lamb wrote:
>On 28 Jul 2000 15:37:05 -0400, David Bolen <db3l at fitlinxx.com> wrote:
>>In the case here it seems as if you don't really want to define the
>>name and associate it with nothing, you want to define the name and
>>associate it with an object that will support being appended to.  In

>    Will this work if the decision is to make it a string, not a list?

No, because strings don't support being appended to.  You can concatenate
two strings to produce a new one, but you can't append to one.

>>Or conversely, you could be asking to really have no definition for a,
>>but have the language implicitly create a new object upon your first
>>attempt to use an ".append" method - something which I don't think is
>>really either intuitive or something that works in the general case
>>for an object oriented model.

>    Hmmm, I see your point there.

As I mentioned, you could also use a function -- the parameter of the
function is by definition of no known contents, and therefore of no known
type.

>         Steve C. Lamb

-- 
-William "Billy" Tanksley