Transcript and Dot Notation

[Rob Cozens]

Dan, Richard, et al:

> Just
> making dot syntax an alternative -- or even implementing OO syntax
> using it -- doesn't have to corrupt the underlying Transcript syntax
> *except* for those people who choose an  OO approach to their Rev
> projects.

So dot syntax is optional...UNLESS people choose to use the OO 
constructs we are hoping for in some future release?

So the option is "use or don't use objects", not "use or don't use dot 
syntax".

How about RRLtd implements OO in an XTalk manner first, and then we 
talk about a dot notation option?  At least then it would be a _real_ 
option.

Rob Cozens
CCW, Serendipity Software Company

"And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three;
Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee."

from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)