Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> The lesson I draw from this is that it's better to keep these things as > well separated as possible. I see. However, "type-assignment" is a quite similar task with validation. In fact, validator can easily report the type information if it wants to do so. Or, in other words, if one wants to implement a "type-reporter", he/she is essentially implementing a validator. In yet other words, > are separate functions and that mushing the two together is a bad idea: > I may want to validate without augmenting the infoset and I may want to > augment the infoset without validating. "Validation without type-assignment" is possible, but "type-assignment without validation" is not possible. Therefore, in implementation level, validator can (and I think it 'should') incorporate type-reporter. I asked this question because your implementation doesn't incorporate type-reporting capability. regards, ---------------------- K.Kawaguchi E-Mail: k-kawa@b...
|
