Re: Output port may be connected to...

"Toman_Vojtech@emc.com" <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com> writes:
> After two years of re-reading the spec, I came to the following
> conclusion regarding the difference. Suppose you have the following
> dependency graph of steps (Y reads the result of X, Z reads the result
> of Y):
>
> X <- Y <- Z
>
> Then X is connected to Y, and Y is connected to Z. Looking from the
> other side, Y has a binding to X, and Z has a binding to Y.
>
> Following this logic, most of the spec seems to make sense to me :)

Wow. I have a much simpler notion in my head: two ports are bound
together (have a binding) if one is connected to the other.

The concern I have about "binding" isn't in connection with the use of
the term "connected" but rather with the use of "binding" to mean
"variable binding" in some places.

I wonder if "connection" could be used instead of "binding" for the
input/output port case...

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | No victor believes in chance.--
http://nwalsh.com/            | Nietzsche