- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 13:00:15 -0300
- To: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Cc: "Gregory Williams" <greg@evilfunhouse.com>, "Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I have now sent the reply to PA-1 nevertheless, I think... > >> [[ > >> Also, note that the actual syntax may still change, in fact, the group is discussing whether to take your proposal on board to allow '+' as a shortcut notation for string concatenation (fn:concat). > >> ]] ... reflects the discussion in these mails, although unsure whether we will get there. Axel On 29 Sep 2010, at 07:03, Steve Harris wrote: > On 2010-09-28, at 19:12, Gregory Williams wrote: > > > On Sep 28, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > >> In the draft response to a comment: > >> > >> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:PA-1 > >> > >> [[ > >> Also, note that the actual syntax may still change, in fact, the group is discussing whether to take your proposal on board to allow '+' as a shortcut notation for string concatenation (fn:concat). > >> ]] > > > > I've never liked the idea of using + for string concatenation. It never seemed to square with my intuition, stemming from numeric addition, that + should be commutative. > > I'm not a fan of overloading in general, but more specifically the use of + for string concatenation in other weakly typed languages, Javascript for .e.g., is problematic. > > - Steve > > -- > Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited > 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK > +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ > Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 > Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD > > >
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 16:01:01 UTC