On Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 02:06:04PM +1300, Greg Ewing wrote: > > It's a new keyword though, which has a much > > higher threshold for acceptance than a new two-character operator > > symbol. > It could be non-reserved, since a div b is currently > a syntax error. Except for the fact our current parser can't handle the 'a div b' syntax without making 'div' a reserved word, which also makes 'x.div', 'class div:' and 'def div():' invalid syntax. It might be work around-able, but .... :P -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4