User talk:PhilmASTErpLus

"aggregate" and "map" are NOT synonyms. "aggregate" is an abstract type; the three concrete implementations of that type are maps, arrays, and plural typed constants (which require a separate implementation because they need to be immutable). --Jasonharper 04:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Uh-huh. Sorry about that editing rampage, should I go and revert them? Or how about alternatives? --PhilmASTErpLus 04:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I was not aware of this either; we'll need to see where that means we need to make changes. --StDoodle (#1059825) 05:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your recent user page update -- the ideal place to put such information, I think, is probably file_to_map. Also, there should probably be a little blurb on that page mentioning that you don't need those files in your data directory (they're built into the jars), but having them present will override the built-in mapfiles. --Heeheehee 23:58, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Browsing through the function pages, I found this: to_string() (see the source for template details) --Heeheehee 19:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

ASH For Beginners

Your recent edit is completely wrong; I would have reverted it, except that the reason field wasn't big enough to explain just how it was wrong.

ALL values in ASH are passed and assigned in a completely uniform manner, regardless of type. That manner could either be referred to as "call by value" or "call by reference"; the two concepts aren't distinct here, since all ASH values are references to some object. No copying is ever done, except as part of an implicit type conversion.

You appear to be confusing the concepts of call type and mutability. There's no difference in how (for example) a map and an int value are passed; the observed differences in behavior are entirely due to the fact that there are ways to modify the contents of a map (with it still remaining the same map), yet no ways of modifying the value of an integer. The closest you can come is to produce a new integer value, and assign it to the same variable that formerly held the old value; it is the variable that is changing, not the value. --Jasonharper 05:49, 27 July 2010 (UTC)