- From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:08:25 +0100
- To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Cc: Christian Grün <christian.gruen@gmail.com>, Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, EXPath <public-expath@w3.org>
On 14 March 2013 10:50, Michael Kay wrote: > Whichever of these is chosen, it should be clear that (like > "numeric" in the F+O functions) it's not (necessarily) a real > type that users can use in their own functions. Would not that restrict the usability of such a type? I expect users to write functions wrapping the binary functions, adding features to them, proxying the params and/or the return values, etc. If their type is not representable by a user function (nor for the type of a variable), I think that would be a huge restriction in usability. Regards, -- Florent Georges http://fgeorges.org/ http://h2oconsulting.be/
Received on Friday, 15 March 2013 10:09:16 UTC