peter wrote:
>loats205 wrote:
>> wouldn't it be cool if you could define custom literal representations for
>your
>> classes?
>
>What problem is this meant to solve as i cant see a use for such a thing.

well it could 'solve' a few problems, or rather simplify a few tasks.
one being persistence, if eval()'ing a database entry in your custom literal
format, returns a new object of your its classes type. it could get really
ugly, if you have 10,000, or even 10 classes with a coresponding literal
expression in one program, but in my mind that would be the developers fault,
not the fact that literal expressions are possible. I don't have any idea ATM
how that would really even be implemented, just an idea.