RE: [xsl] Re: Two "Philisophical" questions about the language

Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: Two "Philisophical" questions about the language
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:26:55 -0000
> I've just thought that by the same token there are dangling 
> sequence items
> in:
> for $item in $items return
>   expr1, expr2
> and in
> if (expr) then
>   expr1
> else
>   expr1, expr2

Yes, I agree, the low operator precedence of "," relative to expressions
like "for" and "if" is counter-intuitive and a rich source of coding errors.
Explicit algol68-style closers (end-for, end-if) would have solved the
problem but they don't appear to be a popular solution.

The more you use explicit type declarations, of course, the more likely such
errors are to show up at compile time.

Michael Kay

Current Thread