[mercury-users] field updates

[Fergus Henderson]

On 03-Nov-2000, david wallin <david at wallin.cx> wrote:
> >
> >I'm not sure how close we are to getting nested unique objects,
> >maybe one of the developers could comment.
> 
> I tried to use nested unique modes in a simple little program, and it 
> seems to work as advertised. So my question is if this feature is 
> partially implemented and not recommended to use yet or if it's 
> actually usable ?

The current implementation is generally too strict (rejects programs
that ought to be allowed), except where arrays are concerned, where it
is too lax (allows programs that ought to be rejected).

On the whole nested unique modes are not very usable, because of the
compiler being too strict.  But with the exception of arrays, anything
in the way of nested unique modes that works now will almost certainly
continue to work, so if what works now is enough for your purposes,
then it's OK to go ahead and use it.

For arrays, it's probably OK to go ahead and use them, but beware that
when we do finally get unique modes working you might need to make some
modifications to your program to make it acceptable to the compiler.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
                                    |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-users mailing list
post:  mercury-users at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-users at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-users-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-users-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------