- From: Christian Grün <christian.gruen@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 21:30:54 +0100
- To: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Cc: Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl>, Public Joint XSLT XQuery XPath <public-xsl-query@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org> wrote: > I guess you can define => in 2 different ways: either by calling RHS > once for each item in LHS, something a bit more "object oriented", > syntactic sugar for "$s ! f(.)", or by calling RHS exactly once, > syntactic sugar for "f($s)". > > Because we chose the latter, there is no reason why treating the empty > sequence in a special way (that'd be dangerous I think). One more note: There has been some discussion to use the placeholder syntax for functions: bla => f(?) This way, it would have been possible to bind the LHS as argument other than the first. As this would have introduced some dependency on the higher-order feature, and as it has been argued that the input of a function will usually be the first argument, this was declined back then.
Received on Thursday, 17 December 2015 20:31:42 UTC