- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:27:44 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1577 ------- Additional Comments From jmdyck@ibiblio.org 2005-09-01 00:27 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > > The way to break the circularity is that you do not really need static > typing. You can just rely on the actual signature declared for the function. Sure, *now*. The acceptance of Bug 1580 means that the original "But which one?" question now goes away. Or maybe it was never a valid question; see Bug 1578 comment #3. > In the case of F&O overloaded functions, there may be multiple signatures but > they are always for atomic types or sequences of atomic types and this results > in the same normalization whichever signature you choose. Actually, for different SequenceType <: xdt:anyAtomicType*, []_Convert(SequenceType) *does* result in different normalizations, since the choice of SequenceType constrains the choice of PrototypicalValue. However, that should now be a moot point.
Received on Thursday, 1 September 2005 00:27:52 UTC