Re: [Bug-apl] A few problems

[vvs]

On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 4:10 PM Dr. Jürgen Sauermann
<address@hidden> wrote:
> At this point A has token class Niladic-Defined-Function-Name (page 25), An 
> attempt to
> change that by:
>
> A←5
>
> is therefore explicitly forbidden by the statement on page 67. It has always 
> bin that way since

And BTW in any functional language these two definitions are
completely independent of each other. It's just a coincidence that the
same name was used for different binding. Depending on rules and
scoping one definition could or could not shadow another, i.e:

A←0
A←1

these are different tokens that just happen to reuse the same name.
And only if that binding changes a token class, then it should be
considered a syntax-error.