array as type vs naming strategy

9.6: adda/syntax/array as type vs naming strategy:

. my previous view of typing
has array being a naming strategy;
but, when refering to the literal values of type obj's,
then how is the array-type's literal expressed?
f(z).z is type (z).z
a#(z).z is type #z.z
s./z is type /.z
. signatures with outparams and externals:

f.(z, <<inout>>, >>out>>)
(( <<extern inout>>, >>extern out>> )).return`type

. one way to keep #() and () in the name
is to view functions and arrays as
naming strategies
. what if a function returns an array
. the literal way to say that a typename in an array enclosure ?
review practical:
keep brief for common use: a#.z
-- the array type (0..n -> z)
-- this is a list, vs the set that functions use .
how is ptr affected by this?
it is not a naming a strategy;
rather, it one type pointing at another type:
.{tall, /}.target.type .
breakthrough insight: [@] adda/unifying pointers and functions