clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> Some features implemented in the normal parser never made it into the
> functions parser.

I had a hunch that something like this was the cause (not the details, but the
general idea of functions being processed 'differently' than, for example,
colors.)

It looks like there are two ways around this problem:

1) to actually fix the situation, by implementing the dot-notation feature into
the functions parser. (I really have no idea what's involved in such a scheme,
so maybe it's a naive idea.)

2) to include a caveat in the documentation-- somewhere(!)-- about dot-notation
use in functions. Similar to the caveat concerning colors (in the docs' "Common
Color Pitfalls") but with a specific restriction about dot-notation.

Of course, it would be nice if dot-notation actually WORKED in functions ;-)
From a user's standpoint, it naively seems that it should.

Post a reply to this message