- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 09:59:31 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29713
--- Comment #10 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> ---
(In reply to Michael Dyck from comment #9)
> (and also the odd syntax for function decls)
Yes, I should have mentioned it was not meant as real code, more-a-less
pseudo-code, sorry for the confusion (as in XPath you cannot declare named
functions, and this should be a feature of XPath, not XQuery, and be allowed
irrespective of whether the function is named or not).
> My inclination would be that they all return the same function value.
You mean, for instance, that f:test#3 would return an infinite-arity function,
or that we forbid f:test#3 (and the overloads) if an infinite-arity function
exists?
I think, for orthogonality, it should work the same as fn:concat. Which means,
there's a single signature with infinite arity (no fixed arity overloads are
allowed), where, for instance, fn:concat#8 returns an eight-arity function
reference. And fn:concat("foo", ?, ?, ?) returns a three-arity function
reference with a single fixed parameter.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2016 09:59:40 UTC