1. RE: Wishlist
-------Phoenix-Boundary-07081998-
Irv Mullins wrote:
>>3-- Pass-by-reference:
>> integer x
>> foo (&x) -- x may be changed
>Useful, but the wrong syntax, in my opinion.
>Perhaps better would be to use:
>procedure foo (integer x)
>.... blah...
>=A0=A0=A0=A0x +=3D1
>then call it like this: foo (varying x)
It would suit me.
>However, this has been requested before, and Rob has not shown
>much interest it implementing it, which leads me to believe that
>something about the internal workings of Euphoria would make
>that operation either difficult, or wasteful of time or memory.
>>5-- Enhanced standard library(s), possibly built-in
>It would just be a matter of organizing them a bit, documenting
>and stamping them all. Maybe Rob doesn't have time for all that.
>All volunteers take one step backward.
Very difficult to do in the democratic volunteer environment. Really
needs a dictator (Rob) 
>>6-- slicing shorthands:
>Also frequently suggested. Your version adds a possible
>syntax checking problem, in that seq[2..] could *easily* be a typo - you
just
>forgot to finish the range.
In my mind, 'seq[2..]' could be a typo in the same sense that
'x +=3D 1' could easily be a typo (it was supposed to be 10!)
I think '..' is prettier than '~', but either is acceptable.
>And as Carl pointed out, there is a definite problem with the
>seq +=3D "a", a notation that confuses me anyway. It looks
>like a math function, maybe you want to add the ascii value of
>"a" to each atom in the sequence=3F 'append' may be wordy,
>but at least its meaning is clear.
The wordiness I was trying to address was not the 'append', but
the redundant 'seq'. My way is a failure; Is there another way=3F
>>7-- File-local definitions should override globals
>Breaks too much code, ..
=3F=3F I don't understand. Isn't it true that file-local definitions
which match globals draw error messages now=3F
The specific case I'm thinking of is:
include mylib.e -- defines 'global type boolean ...'
include file.e -- ERROR -- boolean already defined
The standard Euphoria library file 'file.e' locally defines a
'type boolean ...' This forces the global version to be included after
file.e. This is a minor include file ordering problem in this case,
but could get much worse as libraries proliferate.
>>13- def
>>replaces function or procedure
>Don't like this. There are very good reasons for having functions and
>procedures as entirely separate beasts. def is not definitive enough for
>me.
Ok. That wish came directly from my 'lazy-typist' department.
>>14- structures
>Apparently un-doable with Euphoria as it stands.
>As far as I have been able to determine, there's no way to retain
>the type of a member of a sequence. So type checking items
>within a sequence wouldn't be possible.
If I cant have types, I still want names.
>>15- Block comments
>Example:
>pretext disclaimer =3D
>This program is copyright 2001 by Irv Mullins <ir- at ellijay.com>
>who bears no responsibility for its use. If your hair falls out, your
>cat gets pregnant, or your kids get poison ivy, it's not my fault.
>=A0=A0=A0So there!
>end pretext
good idea, but see new wish # 18 below
>>17- Automatic 'Result'
>I'm not sure I understand the advantage this has over simply
>putting 'return 3.14' as the final line in the function. Please elaborate.
This is another minor 'lazy-typist' wish. I was noticing the large number
of functions I write that start off:
function foo ()
integer Result
Result =3D 0
...
and thinking how nice it would be if the common 'Result' were built-in.
Pretty minor!
18- Concatenated strings
Euphoria should merge successive strings, including across
lines.
sequence s
s =3D "this is" " a single string"
s=3D "this is also"
" a single string!"
P.S. My 'GOO' translator implements a number of these wishes, including
namespaces,
slicing shorthands, and initializers. (Beware: its dot-notation objects
only work in the simplest cases.)
Regards
Karl Bochert
-------Phoenix-Boundary-07081998---
2. RE: Wishlist
G'day all
david at aldred.demon.co.uk wrote:
> <snip>
> And from even further back in my programming history, but something I've
> missed since using Algol -
>
> for i = {1,4,5.6,e/2, sin(theta)} do
> (something with i)
> next
Good idea. A couple of "improvements":
Allow ranges in the list, eg
for i = {1..4, 5.6, e/2, 39..199}
Allow "mixed mode", eg
sequence seq1, seq2
seq1 = {1,4,10}
seq2 = {e/2,sin(theta),87}
for i = {seq1,21..39,seq2,101,103}
Change "for" to something like "foreach", a visual clue that we're
doing some "list processing" rather than a conventional loop. Yes,
I know, another reserved word, more chances to break existing code...
Just my $0.02
Regards
Tony
3. RE: Wishlist
G'day all
Irv Mullins wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 June 2001 17:50, david at aldred.demon.co.uk wrote:
> >
> > And from even further back in my programming history, but something I've
> > missed since using Algol -
> >
> > for i = {1,4,5.6,e/2, sin(theta)} do
> > (something with i)
> > next
> >
> > which then does the loop for the values in the sequence, one at a time.
>
> If I recall correctly, that would be impossible with Euphoria, which
> makes
> a copy of the loop variables before beginning, so any change would be
> disregarded. Let's see:
>
> atom x, y
>
> x = 1
> y = 10
> for i = x to y do
> x -=1
> ? i
> end for
>
> Yep, counts from 1 to 10.
>
> Regards,
> Irv
>
I don't think anyone wants to change the value of the loop variable
*inside* the loop. The suggestion is for another way to set the
value of the loop variable *prior* to its use inside the loop.
Ferinstance, if I wanted to process only certain elements of a
sequence, I'd have to use something like:
sequence seqindex
seqindex = {3, 5, 10, 21, 22, 40, 45, 50, 63}
for i = 1 to length(seqindex)
seq2process[seqindex[i]] = <something>
end for
The suggestion is for an easier way to do this sort of work, eg:
foreach i = {3, 5, 10, 21, 22, 40, 45, 50 ,63}
seq2process[i] = <something>
? i
end foreach
would result in:
3
5
10
21
<etc>
Besides, any idea for minimizing [..[]] and [][] and suchlike
syntax for sequences can't be all bad ;)
Regards
Tony
4. RE: Wishlist
On 28 Jun 2001, at 5:34, Tony Bucholtz wrote:
>
> I don't think anyone wants to change the value of the loop variable
> *inside* the loop.
Let me raise my paws higher then! While i haven't wanted to recently, having
control of the loop var can be useful. Ferinstance, if you wanted to start over
on a condition, or you have a huge list to process in the loop and want to
skip one item conditionally on a *previous* state, or collection of states. Yes,
it can be done other ways, but like a "goto", things can sometimes be done
easier a different way.
Kat
