[m-dev.] for review: improvements for record syntax

[schachte at cs.mu.OZ.AU]

On 10 Dec, Simon Taylor wrote:
> 
> Here we go again.

You didn't think we were going to reach an armistice in the syntax wars,
did you? ;-)

> How about:
> 	X = Map ^ entry(Key)
> and	Map ^ entry(Key) := Y

`entry' is not bad, and I agree it's better than `value'.  How about
`item'?  It sounds like about the same meaning to me as `elem', but
it's not an abbreviation.  And it's a letter shorter than `entry'
and `value'.  I'd mark my (preference-based) ballot:

elem   [2]
value  [4]
entry  [3]
item   [1]


-- 
Peter Schachte                     The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its
mailto:schachte at cs.mu.OZ.AU        teaching should, therefore, be regarded
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~schachte/  as a criminal offense.
PGP: finger schachte at 128.250.37.3      -- E. W. Dijkstra 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-developers mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-developers at cs.mu.oz.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-developers-request at cs.mu.oz.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------