1. Re: A rant on an Ideal languages
David Cuny wrote:
>If Euphoria had an eval() statement, it would be a lot easier to create
>scripting languages in it. I doubt that Robert would consider adding one,
>though.
>
>One thing I'd really like having would be a dynamic include file, such as
>
> include_file( sequence fileName )
>
>That way, you could convert the script into a Euphoria file, such as:
>
> -- converted script
> procedure button_command( object self )
> puts( 1, "Hello, world!" )
> destroy( self )
> end procedure
>
> constant hello = button()
> set_text( hello, "Hello, World" )
> set_command( hello, routine_id("button_command"))
> pack( hello )
>
>and then load it dynamically:
>
> include_file("script.exw")
>
This seems a very benign way to get a little dynamic access to the
interpreter if there really is one. Maybe, it is a way to have incremental
compilation, if Euphoria is a compile and go as I think. Either way, it would
vastly expand the power of the language for fairly small cost. I vote
wholeheartedly for this one. Of course, this just absolutely requires a
cleanup of namespace handling.
Everett L.(Rett) Williams
rett at gvtc.com
