Re: Forgotten but not gone
Re: Forgotten but not gone
- Subject: Re: Forgotten but not gone
- From: "Arthur J Knapp" <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 13:07:51 -0500
>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:55:29 +0000
>
From: Charles Arthur <email@hidden>
>
Subject: Re: Forgotten but not gone
>
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:31:48 -0800, Richard 23 <email@hidden> wrote:
>
>For reasons of efficency due to the common usage of lists the
>
>linked list was put into the closet but not without providing
>
>compatibility with the original data type.
>
Even weirder (or more fascinating):
>
set a to [1, 2]
>
set b to [3, 4]
>
set c to a & b
>
set second item of b to 99
>
c --> {1, 2, 3, 99}
>
>
set a to {1, 2}
>
set b to [3, 4]
>
set c to a & b
>
set second item of b to 99
>
c --> {1, 2, 3, 4}
>
>
So curly brackets rule over vectors... fascinating...
Well, it's a question of data type compatibility,
a linked-list can't *link* itself to a vector,
therefore, it doesn't data share with b.
--
{
Arthur J Knapp, of STELLARViSIONs ;
http://www.STELLARViSIONs.com ;
mailto:email@hidden ;
"...well the rain falls down
without my help, I'm afraid
and my lawn gets wet,
though I withheld my consent..."
}