On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> wrote:
> YUriy Zhuravlev wrote:
>>
>> On Friday 06 November 2015 12:55:44 you wrote:
>>>
>>> Omitted bounds are common in other languages and would be handy. I
>>> don't think they'd cause any issues with multi-dimensional arrays or
>>> variable start-pos arrays.
>>
>>
>> And yet, what about my patch?
>
> My vote: let us do it, mean, omitting bounds. It simplifies syntax in rather
> popular queries.
+1 useful and intuitive
>> Discussions about ~ and{:} it seems optional.
>
> ~ is allowed as unary operator and therefore such syntax will introduce
> incompatibily/ambiguity.
+1 IMO this line of thinking is a dead end. Better handled via
functions, not syntax
merlin
