Re: Euphoria features
----- Original Message -----
From: Roderick Jackson <rjackson at CSIWEB.COM>
To: <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 1999 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: Euphoria features
> >(Back then "object" was the *only* type,
> >for-loops didn't exist, ... the good old days!)
>
> !!!
>
> So there was NO type-checking at all? I'm shocked!
> Well, frankly I think the introduction of types
> (and the elegant implementation of user-defined
> types) was a plus. I really can't see how you could
> verify user input without it:
>
> if (integer (x)) then
Another language i use has *zero* type checking, other than internally in
it's functions/procedures and binary vars (which i can use like sequences),
so if i want to know what is in a var, i use :
if ( x isin %alphabet )
if ( x !isin %numset )
if ( x isin %punctset )
or i pass it to a math function,, $round() will round off trailing
non-numerals, for instance. You don't need types to write code. It's only
occasionally handy in debugging when you have no control over what may be in
the variable you want to look at.
> I won't even *touch* the lack of for-loops...
I still want goto's. And i want to be able to goto a variable's contents
too, as if it were a form of case statement.
whatisthis {
goto $1
:apple return fruit
:potato return vegetable
}
( it returns $null if $1 is not a target )
Kat,
still looking for the ideal language.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
