From: "David A. Black" Date: 2005-08-06T23:39:31+09:00 Subject: Re: new block notation Hi -- On Sat, 6 Aug 2005, Daniel Brockman wrote: > "David A. Black" writes: > >> I'm still not seeing how >> >> [:] >> >> or >> >> [=>] >> >> conveys the notion of 'emptiness' better than >> >> {} > > The reason people are suggesting the [:] syntax is to avoid > the confusion with blocks. Since {} doesn't avoid the > confusion with blocks, [:] is in this sense better. I may be taking the discussion in a circle, but... what confusion with blocks? (I'm confused about the confusion :-) David -- David A. Black dblack@wobblini.net