home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu.tar
/
ftp.cs.arizona.edu
/
icon
/
newsgrp
/
group94b.txt
/
000120_icon-group-sender _Tue Nov 22 15:33:59 1994.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1995-02-09
|
2KB
Received: by cheltenham.cs.arizona.edu; Tue, 22 Nov 1994 09:18:37 MST
To: icon-group-l@cs.arizona.edu
Date: 22 Nov 1994 15:33:59 GMT
From: pmcnally@uoguelph.ca (Paul Mcnally)
Message-Id: <3at317$qus@nermal.cs.uoguelph.ca>
Organization: University of Guelph
Sender: icon-group-request@cs.arizona.edu
References: <3aonpq$4kp@caslon.cs.arizona.edu>, <3aqp29$do0@cheltenham.cs.arizona.edu>, <3aspdf$ob3@highway.LeidenUniv.nl>
Subject: Re: optional typing in Icon (longish)
Errors-To: icon-group-errors@cs.arizona.edu
[stuff deleted]
I find this thread very interesting. I am currently reading _The Icon
Programming Lanuguage_ by Griswold & Griswold. More specifically, I have
read the section on records. I was able to do all sorts of untold things
to various fields that would horrify my professors! (not a bad idea ;) )
I think that records would be one of those instances where the types
do not usually (should not ? ) change. In fact, the fact that
there is no static typing in records makes icon a dubious choice in
database applications. Any comments?
I am currently writing an undergraduate term paper on icon and any
comments on this or any issue would be well received.
Thx
Paul
--
\\\\\//
| |
(.)^(.)
==========================oOO==(_)==OOo============================
Paul McNally
Computer Support
Computing & Communications Services
University of Guelph
Ontario, Canada
===================================================================