Am I getting this all right?

[Jarrett Billingsley]

"Bill Baxter" <dnewsgroup at billbaxter.com> wrote in message 
news:elsvmo$rsb$1 at digitaldaemon.com...

> I guess not.  Might be interesting if AA's allowed a void value type.
>
>   void[int] myset;
>
> Hmm... maybe not.

Actually, they used to, and people used them as sets :)  Of course, that was 
also before accessing a nonexistent AA element was an indexing error, so to 
add something to the set, you did

set[4] = set[4];

Which would add 4, or just be a no-op.  Now that's just plain illegal, so 
even if void were allowed as the value type, there'd be no way to add 
anything to the set.  Besides, what does void[int] mean?  (then again you 
can have a void[], which is also kind of weird, but..).

> :-)  But it was almost that long wasn't it?  And Walter was one of the the 
> ones that kicked it off, IIRC.  So I had high hopes something would come 
> of it.

I don't know.  Maybe we didn't say the right things.