|
Don't get too discouraged. Though I am agnostic on your proposal, I find the : and . syntax to be a huge source of errors and confusion, both because . works as : in most other languages, and because the . and the : resemble one another in both function and appearance leading to cognitive confusion.So, to calm down things, I will try hard to avoid answering messages about OOBit subject, ok?
I think at the very least the syntax should be changed from a : to another symbol (-> ?) to make the distinction clearer. Until that happens, I share your desire to find a way to make the . operator work as the : does.
Chris Eykamp