OpenEuphoria

Re: Irv.. append etc

• Posted by Irv Mullins <irvm at ellijay.com> Mar 21, 2002
• 617 views

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:36:42 +0100
a.tammer at hetnet.nl wrote:

> 
> sorry Irv, i think your explanation needs some correction.
> apart from the mistaken ] in the nested example which should be }
> i guess the best way to put the result would be:
> 
>      {'A','n','t',{'C','a','t'},{'D','o','g'},{'R','a','t'}}, being:
> a sequence consisting in:
>   1) 3 atoms,
>   2) a subsequence of 3 atoms
>   3)          ""
>   4)          ""
> 
> Do you agree?

Technically, you're correct. However, we're talking as programmers who are 
accustomed to using more mainstream languages, where a string, aka
'array of char', is a concept more meaningful than "a sequence of atoms".
Since Euphoria can address the {'C','a','t'} as a unit, and print "Cat", 
it seems more useful to write it that way. 

Had we meant to store a sequence of atoms (aka a numeric array), I would have
written it as: {67,97,116}

Regards,
Irv