1. A proposal on scope
- Posted by rforno at tutopia.com
Jul 15, 2001
Rob:
I have this proposal for version 2.3:
Allow declaring variables at the beginning of 'for' and 'while' loops, and
make them local to these loops.
Thanks for your attention.
2. Re: A proposal on scope
On 15 Jul 2001, at 19:06, rforno at tutopia.com wrote:
>
> Rob:
> I have this proposal for version 2.3:
> Allow declaring variables at the beginning of 'for' and 'while' loops, and
> make them local to these loops.
I'll bet he says the same thing as for "goto": make a separate procedure and
just call it.
procedure somthin
sequence a -- local
atom b -- local
integer d -- local
-- code
end procedure -- somthin
for loop = 1 to 3 do
somthin
end for
Which doesn't always work well for program flow control "goto"s, especially
trying to read it, i am always going *up* in the program listing to find the
procedures, and not *down* thru it like i'd prefer.
Kat
3. Re: A proposal on scope
- Posted by irvm at ellijay.com
Jul 15, 2001
On Sunday 15 July 2001 21:49, Kat wrote:
> Which doesn't always work well for program flow control "goto"s, especially
> trying to read it, i am always going *up* in the program listing to find
> the procedures, and not *down* thru it like i'd prefer.
Turn the page upside down?
Irv
4. Re: A proposal on scope
Howdy Irv!
> Turn the page upside down?
I tested your suggestion, without success. Everything I tried to puts()
test onto the screen, it came out backwards, and the interpreter is
complaining about backwards references and inverted assignments. But
then again, it has also given me a relevation of how they created
Windows. Suggestion for 2.3, Mr. Craig ... please allow upside-down
code ... or build another interpreter for the task, named wxe.exe.
Thanks,
Travis
5. Re: A proposal on scope
Travis,
----- Original Message -----
From: "Travis Beaty" <travis_n_marylou at yahoo.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: Re: A proposal on scope
> > Turn the page upside down?
>
> I tested your suggestion, without success. Everything I tried to puts()
> test onto the screen, it came out backwards, and the interpreter is
> complaining about backwards references and inverted assignments. But
> then again, it has also given me a relevation of how they created
> Windows. Suggestion for 2.3, Mr. Craig ... please allow upside-down
> code ... or build another interpreter for the task, named wxe.exe.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Travis
Do you think, then, that wxe syntax should accept stup() instead of puts()?
And, of course, esrever() ? No big change on motas, but secneuqes will
become rather difficult to recognize, especially when you dneppa or dneperp
something to them. Besides, how should a forwardish source file include a
backwardish one? However, all this would be homogeneized if all Eu srcs
became palindromic. Perhaps for 2.4?
Gerardo
6. Re: A proposal on scope
rforno writes:
> I have this proposal for version 2.3:
> Allow declaring variables at the beginning of 'for'
> and 'while' loops, and
> make them local to these loops.
C has that feature, and I sometimes make use of it,
but it's obviously not necessary, and I'd like
Euphoria to remain a simple, minimal language as
much as possible.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
7. Re: A proposal on scope
On 16 Jul 2001, at 1:32, Gerardo wrote:
>
> Travis,
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Travis Beaty" <travis_n_marylou at yahoo.com>
> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 11:22 PM
> Subject: Re: A proposal on scope
>
>
> > > Turn the page upside down?
I did that,, and put as many lines on the scrren as possible, then built a
fresnel lens to project it onto the wall, that gave me 400 lines from ceiling to
floor, but it wasn't enough. Then i tried scrolling, and now i haveto build a
new
wall. <sigh>
> >
> > I tested your suggestion, without success. Everything I tried to puts()
> > test onto the screen, it came out backwards, and the interpreter is
> > complaining about backwards references and inverted assignments. But
> > then again, it has also given me a relevation of how they created
> > Windows. Suggestion for 2.3, Mr. Craig ... please allow upside-down
> > code ... or build another interpreter for the task, named wxe.exe.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Travis
>
> Do you think, then, that wxe syntax should accept stup() instead of puts()?
> And,
> of course, esrever() ? No big change on motas, but secneuqes will become
> rather
Sheesh, exceptions in the language already! You said "motas", but then
used "secneuqes"! Shouldn't it have been either "smota" or "ecneuqess"?? I
can't work like this,, tell me when it's out of beta! Sheesh!
taK
