1. Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 540 views
Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included into the same namespace? Here is an example of what I want to do: include misc.e as rds include machine.e as rds include dll.e as rds Currently the interpreter gives an error. Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be included by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that there will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to make a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent namespace pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs to come up with. -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.
2. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 512 views
Jason Gade wrote: > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included > into > the same namespace? > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > include misc.e as rds > include machine.e as rds > include dll.e as rds > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be included > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that > there > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to make > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > namespace > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs to > come up with. > > -- > "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." > --anonymous > "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." > --M. Haertel > j. Hi there, So i guess you're saying you want to include multiple files under the same namespace so functions can be called in multiple files using the same prefix...interesting... Take care, Al And, good luck with your Euphoria programming! My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
3. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 523 views
Al Getz wrote: > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included > > into > > the same namespace? > > > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > > > include misc.e as rds > > include machine.e as rds > > include dll.e as rds > > > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be > > included > > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that > > there > > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to > > make > > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > > namespace > > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs > > to > > come up with. > > Hi there, > > > So i guess you're saying you want to include multiple files under the > same namespace so functions can be called in multiple files using > the same prefix...interesting... Yes. That's the way it works in C++, several related includes are part of the same namespace. C++ also has the 'using namespace' keyword. But right now I'm looking through the listserv archives to understand better how namespace rules actually work. I've noticed so far that they don't exactly do what I think they do. So far I've found that using namespaces within a library won't prevent symbol conflicts in user programs, though using them might make them easier to fix. The user program will still have to use a namespace when a conflict arises. By my example, I don't really expect there to be a symbol conflict with RDS libs, but I was trying to be "future proof" and protect the user from having to worry about it. -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.
4. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 511 views
Jason Gade wrote: > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included > into > the same namespace? > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > include misc.e as rds > include machine.e as rds > include dll.e as rds > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be included > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that > there > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to make > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > namespace > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs to > come up with. > > -- > "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." > --anonymous > "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." > --M. Haertel > j. Hi Jason, I don't think agree with this idea. Heres why: What if you had two or more files with globals with the same name? If those two files where assigned the same namespace how would you differentiate, for example, between the "foo" routines, variables, or constants in the multiple files under the same namespace? Or maybe there is something I'm not understanding here? Now that Robert has agreed to fix, in my opionion, the biggest potential problem with Euphoria, I think we should let him be with all the feature requests. I don't want him to think that now that he's granted a feature that we will expect more and more. Maybe that is the case for some people, but not with me. I bet Robert has enough feature ideas to keep him going for many releases after Euphoria v3.0. Lets let him use them all before requesting a whole bunch more. Regards, Vincent
5. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 497 views
Vincent wrote: > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included > > into > > the same namespace? > > > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > > > include misc.e as rds > > include machine.e as rds > > include dll.e as rds > > > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be > > included > > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that > > there > > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to > > make > > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > > namespace > > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs > > to > > come up with. > > Hi Jason, > > I don't think agree with this idea. > > Heres why: > > What if you had two or more files with globals with the same name? If those > two files where assigned the same namespace how would you differentiate, for > example, between the "foo" routines, variables, or constants in the multiple > files under the same namespace? Or maybe there is something I'm not > understanding > here? See in my post where I say "But when I know that there will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to make a new namespace for every single include." If you include two files *without* a namespace qualifier you get an error when trying to reference conflicting symbols. So your example should still be an error. > Now that Robert has agreed to fix, in my opionion, the biggest potential > problem > with Euphoria, I think we should let him be with all the feature requests. I > don't want him to think that now that he's granted a feature that we will > expect > more and more. Maybe that is the case for some people, but not with me. > > I bet Robert has enough feature ideas to keep him going for many releases > after > Euphoria v3.0. Lets let him use them all before requesting a whole bunch more. > > > Regards, > Vincent -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.
6. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 493 views
Jason Gade wrote: > > Al Getz wrote: > > > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > > > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included > > > into > > > the same namespace? > > > > > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > > > > > include misc.e as rds > > > include machine.e as rds > > > include dll.e as rds > > > > > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > > > > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be > > > included > > > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that > > > there > > > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to > > > make > > > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > > > namespace > > > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs > > > to > > > come up with. > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > So i guess you're saying you want to include multiple files under the > > same namespace so functions can be called in multiple files using > > the same prefix...interesting... > > Yes. That's the way it works in C++, several related includes are part of the > same namespace. C++ also has the 'using namespace' keyword. > > But right now I'm looking through the listserv archives to understand better > how namespace rules actually work. I've noticed so far that they don't exactly > do what I think they do. > > So far I've found that using namespaces within a library won't prevent symbol > conflicts in user programs, though using them might make them easier to fix. > The user program will still have to use a namespace when a conflict arises. > > By my example, I don't really expect there to be a symbol conflict with RDS > libs, but I was trying to be "future proof" and protect the user from having > to worry about it. > > -- > "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." > --anonymous > "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." > --M. Haertel > j. Hi again, I guess there are good points to this and bad points, but i havent thought it all through myself yet. I wanted to be able to include the same file more than once (which would be easy in the source code) and have it load again so that local variables get repeated: --Start Manager.ew atom a global procedure LoadA(atom x) a=x end procedure global function GetA() return a end function --End Manager.ew include Manager.ew as M1 include Manager.ew as M2 M1:LoadA(10) M2:LoadA(20) ?M1:GetA() --prints "10" ?M2:GetA() --prints "20" Currently, you have to copy and rename Manager.ew and included it a second time with it's new name include Manager1.ew as M1 include Manager2.ew as M2 If we could include the same file twice and get a new instance loaded (as per code far above) we would be able to handle files as entire objects, which would increase the functionality of Euphoria quite a bit. Imagine being able to write a 'class' file as an include file that had all kinds of functionality including functions AND data structures, and in one line be able to repeat that 'object' include MyClass.ew as Class1 include MyClass.ew as Class2 Add to that the ability to index and WOW we've got incredible functionality: Class={1,2,3,4,5} for k=1 to 5 do include MyClass.ew as Class[k] end for and suddenly we can index entire classes: data1=Class[1]:data data2=Class[2]:data etc. WOW!!!!!!!! Take care, Al And, good luck with your Euphoria programming! My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
7. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 501 views
Jason Gade wrote: > See in my post where I say "But when I know that there will be no conflicts > within the files that I'm including I don't want to make a new namespace for > every single include." > > If you include two files *without* a namespace qualifier you get an error when > trying to reference conflicting symbols. So your example should still be an > error. > > j. I understand your reason for wanting this but it gives the opportunity for the user to make another possible problem. The namespace was implemented to solve the problem with conflicting symbols. With your method it is possible for problems to occur without a namespace identifier and with one holding the same named symbols from two or more different files. I had a very difficult time convincing Rob to fix the duplicate filename issue. Do you really think you could convince Rob or even the majority of us to agree with this concept? No offense. Regards, Vincent
8. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 515 views
Vincent wrote: > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > See in my post where I say "But when I know that there will be no conflicts > > within the files that I'm including I don't want to make a new namespace for > > every single include." > > > > If you include two files *without* a namespace qualifier you get an error > > when > > trying to reference conflicting symbols. So your example should still be an > > error. > > > > j. > > I understand your reason for wanting this but it gives the opportunity for the > user to make another possible problem. The namespace was implemented to solve > the problem with conflicting symbols. With your method it is possible for > problems > to occur without a namespace identifier and with one holding the same named > symbols from two or more different files. I understand what you are saying, but I disagree. If this was implemented and I tried to include two files in the same namespace AND if I got an error because of a conflict, I would change one of the namespaces. That is the same thing I would do now if I included two files without namespaces and got an error because of a conflict. Since I am writing a library, it will have *ZERO* affect on users of my library. Just on me. Now when I originally posted the question, I thought that namespaces worked differently than they do. I've since found that no matter what namespace I use in my library, it will not prevent a conflict in a user's program. So the point is probably moot. When writing libraries, I should be very careful of what I include so that I don't introduce naming conflicts further downstream. > > I had a very difficult time convincing Rob to fix the duplicate filename > issue. > Do you really think you could convince Rob or even the majority of us to agree > with this concept? No. I don't expect I'll have any chance of convincing Rob. Convincing other users, well maybe... > > No offense. None taken. -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.
9. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 520 views
- Last edited Feb 12, 2006
Al Getz wrote: > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > > Al Getz wrote: > > > > > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > > > > > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be > > > > included > into</font></i> > > > > the same namespace? > > > > > > > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > > > > > > > include misc.e as rds > > > > include machine.e as rds > > > > include dll.e as rds > > > > > > > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > > > > > > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be > > > > included > > > > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know > > > > that > there</font></i> > > > > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to > > > > make > > > > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > > > > namespace > > > > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program > > > > needs to > > > > come up with. > > > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > > > > So i guess you're saying you want to include multiple files under the > > > same namespace so functions can be called in multiple files using > > > the same prefix...interesting... > > > > Yes. That's the way it works in C++, several related includes are part of > > the > > same namespace. C++ also has the 'using namespace' keyword. > > > > But right now I'm looking through the listserv archives to understand better > > how namespace rules actually work. I've noticed so far that they don't > > exactly > > do what I think they do. > > > > So far I've found that using namespaces within a library won't prevent > > symbol > > conflicts in user programs, though using them might make them easier to fix. > > The user program will still have to use a namespace when a conflict arises. > > > > By my example, I don't really expect there to be a symbol conflict with RDS > > libs, but I was trying to be "future proof" and protect the user from having > > to worry about it. > > > > -- > > "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." > > --anonymous > > "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." > > --M. Haertel > > j. > > Hi again, > > I guess there are good points to this and bad points, but i havent > thought it all through myself yet. > I wanted to be able to include the same file more than once (which > would be easy in the source code) and have it load again so that > local variables get repeated: > > --Start Manager.ew > atom a > global procedure LoadA(atom x) > a=x > end procedure > global function GetA() > return a > end function > --End Manager.ew > > include Manager.ew as M1 > include Manager.ew as M2 > > M1:LoadA(10) > M2:LoadA(20) > > ?M1:GetA() --prints "10" > ?M2:GetA() --prints "20" > > Currently, you have to copy and rename Manager.ew and included it a second > time with it's new name > include Manager1.ew as M1 > include Manager2.ew as M2 > > If we could include the same file twice and get a new instance loaded > (as per code far above) we would be able to handle files as entire > objects, which would increase the functionality of Euphoria quite a bit. > Imagine being able to write a 'class' file as an include file that had > all kinds of functionality including functions AND data structures, > and in one line be able to repeat that 'object' > include MyClass.ew as Class1 > include MyClass.ew as Class2 > > Add to that the ability to index and WOW we've got incredible functionality: > Class={1,2,3,4,5} > for k=1 to 5 do > include MyClass.ew as Class[k] > end for > and suddenly we can index entire classes: > data1=Class[1]:data > data2=Class[2]:data > etc. > > WOW!!!!!!!! > > > Al > > > My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's" I really wish that it worked that way, too. I've lobbied for it in the past (except for the include as Class[k] bit -- Beautiful! I can see all kinds of possibilities). I think that it would provide more modularity and make OO like you are proposing easier. But RDS is extremely unlikely to implement it because... well because Rob likes the way includes work now! In fact, I'm still surprised that Vincent finally got him to give a little slack on the includes-with-the-same-filename-but-different-paths problem. -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.
10. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 510 views
- Last edited Feb 12, 2006
Jason Gade wrote: > > Al Getz wrote: > > > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > > > > Al Getz wrote: > > > > > > > > Jason Gade wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be > > > > > included > > into</font></i> > > > > > the same namespace? > > > > > > > > > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > > > > > > > > > include misc.e as rds > > > > > include machine.e as rds > > > > > include dll.e as rds > > > > > > > > > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > > > > > > > > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be > > > > > included > > > > > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know > > > > > that > > there</font></i> > > > > > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want > > > > > to > make</font></i> > > > > > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > > > > > namespace > > > > > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program > > > > > needs > to</font></i> > > > > > come up with. > > > > > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > > > > > > > So i guess you're saying you want to include multiple files under the > > > > same namespace so functions can be called in multiple files using > > > > the same prefix...interesting... > > > > > > Yes. That's the way it works in C++, several related includes are part of > > > the > > > same namespace. C++ also has the 'using namespace' keyword. > > > > > > But right now I'm looking through the listserv archives to understand > > > better > > > how namespace rules actually work. I've noticed so far that they don't > > > exactly > > > do what I think they do. > > > > > > So far I've found that using namespaces within a library won't prevent > > > symbol > > > conflicts in user programs, though using them might make them easier to > > > fix. > > > The user program will still have to use a namespace when a conflict > > > arises. > > > > > > By my example, I don't really expect there to be a symbol conflict with > > > RDS > > > libs, but I was trying to be "future proof" and protect the user from > > > having > > > to worry about it. > > > > > > -- > > > "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." > > > --anonymous > > > "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of > > > indirection." > > > --M. Haertel > > > j. > > > > Hi again, > > > > I guess there are good points to this and bad points, but i havent > > thought it all through myself yet. > > I wanted to be able to include the same file more than once (which > > would be easy in the source code) and have it load again so that > > local variables get repeated: > > > > --Start Manager.ew > > atom a > > global procedure LoadA(atom x) > > a=x > > end procedure > > global function GetA() > > return a > > end function > > --End Manager.ew > > > > include Manager.ew as M1 > > include Manager.ew as M2 > > > > M1:LoadA(10) > > M2:LoadA(20) > > > > ?M1:GetA() --prints "10" > > ?M2:GetA() --prints "20" > > > > Currently, you have to copy and rename Manager.ew and included it a second > > time with it's new name > > include Manager1.ew as M1 > > include Manager2.ew as M2 > > > > If we could include the same file twice and get a new instance loaded > > (as per code far above) we would be able to handle files as entire > > objects, which would increase the functionality of Euphoria quite a bit. > > Imagine being able to write a 'class' file as an include file that had > > all kinds of functionality including functions AND data structures, > > and in one line be able to repeat that 'object' > > include MyClass.ew as Class1 > > include MyClass.ew as Class2 > > > > Add to that the ability to index and WOW we've got incredible functionality: > > Class={1,2,3,4,5} > > for k=1 to 5 do > > include MyClass.ew as Class[k] > > end for > > and suddenly we can index entire classes: > > data1=Class[1]:data > > data2=Class[2]:data > > etc. > > > > WOW!!!!!!!! > > > > > > Al > > > > > > My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's" > > I really wish that it worked that way, too. I've lobbied for it in the past <snip> He he, yeah :) I think that neither Rob nor anyone else truely understands the power of programming that would come out of something like this. To be able to declare a class the same way you declare a variable like 'atom x' is quite a powerful programming technique, and the logic behind it stems from the way a language progresses anyway: You start with variables, which you include by declaring them: atom a You move toward 'groups' of these things: sequence s s={0,1,23,4} You add function calls: x=myfunc() You add 'include' files which allow you to keep functions and data (variables) in the same file as a set of functions and data. A logical next step is to be able to declare your built up function/data groups as a single object which can be repeated the same way you declare a 'normal' variable: Normal var (Euphoria allows many atoms to be declared): atom a atom b Group (Class): include MyGroup.ew as MG1 include MyGroup.ew as MG2 and now we have two groups to use as well as two atoms. Maybe a better wording would have been: atom a,b group("MyGroup.ew") MG1, MG2 so it ends up being something like a 'type', only a prefix instead. I guess another keyword would be more clear: include class MyGroup.ew as MG1 include class MyGroup.ew as MG2 ie a Euphoria with classes :) (the word 'include' is optional). Euphoria allows you to 'include' as many atoms and sequences as you care to declare, so why not allow you to include (declare) as many custom built objects as you care to ? Think also about how fast it would be to wrap a class object? You wouldnt have to try to 'sequence the living carp' out of everything he he :) (ie stick every dang thing into some sequence somewhere AND maintain them all). Take care, Al And, good luck with your Euphoria programming! My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
11. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 510 views
- Last edited Feb 12, 2006
Al Getz wrote: <snip> > I think that neither Rob nor anyone else truely understands the power > of programming that would come out of something like this. To be able > to declare a class the same way you declare a variable like 'atom x' > is quite a powerful programming technique, and the logic behind it > stems from the way a language progresses anyway: > > You start with variables, which you include by declaring them: > atom a > You move toward 'groups' of these things: > sequence s > s={0,1,23,4} > You add function calls: > x=myfunc() > You add 'include' files which allow you to keep functions and > data (variables) in the same file as a set of functions and data. > > A logical next step is to be able to declare your built up > function/data groups as a single object which can be repeated > the same way you declare a 'normal' variable: > Normal var (Euphoria allows many atoms to be declared): > atom a > atom b > Group (Class): > include MyGroup.ew as MG1 > include MyGroup.ew as MG2 > > and now we have two groups to use as well as two atoms. > > Maybe a better wording would have been: > atom a,b > group("MyGroup.ew") MG1, MG2 > so it ends up being something like a 'type', only a prefix instead. > > I guess another keyword would be more clear: > > include class MyGroup.ew as MG1 > include class MyGroup.ew as MG2 > > ie a Euphoria with classes :) (the word 'include' is optional). > > > Euphoria allows you to 'include' as many atoms and sequences as > you care to declare, so why not allow you to include (declare) as > many custom built objects as you care to ? > Think also about how fast it would be to wrap a class object? > You wouldnt have to try to 'sequence the living carp' out of > everything he he :) (ie stick every dang thing into some sequence > somewhere AND maintain them all). > > > Al > > > My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's" I'm not a big fan of OO, but I can see its usefulness. Euphoria includes can practically be classes as they are, but only as singletons (I think that's the OO word I'm looking for). Include files can keep state and allow or restrict access to that state. But in order to have more than one instance, you have to write a lot of logic in your include to handle that. I don't think any new keywords need to be added to make includes work as classes. -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.
12. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com> Feb 11, 2006
- 517 views
- Last edited Feb 12, 2006
Jason Gade wrote: > > I don't think any new keywords need to be added to make includes work as > classes. > Well, i just thought that using a new keyword would mean it wouldnt interfere with 'normal' include operation, and we'd still get the functionality. Take care, Al And, good luck with your Euphoria programming! My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
13. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Feb 12, 2006
- 506 views
Jason Gade wrote: > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included > into > the same namespace? > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > include misc.e as rds > include machine.e as rds > include dll.e as rds > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be included > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that > there > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to make > a new namespace for every single include. I really don't want to open up the whole namespace can of worms over a relatively minor thing like this. I think the way it works now, with one namespace id per included file, is fine. > This will also help prevent namespace > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs to > come up with. Namespace identifiers have a scope that is local to the file they are defined in. So there is no "pollution" across files. Regards, Rob Craig Rapid Deployment Software http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
14. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 12, 2006
- 528 views
Robert Craig wrote: > > Namespace identifiers have a scope that is local to the file > they are defined in. So there is no "pollution" across files. > > Regards, > Rob Craig > Rapid Deployment Software > <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a> Don't worry, I've come to my senses on this. But I didn't mean that the namespace identifier was polluting the namespace, I meant that the included file's globals were polluting the namespace. But I made a later post basically saying that I wasn't going to worry about it anymore until I figured out how to implement it and experiment with it myself in eu.ex. If that ever actually happens... Fortunately I am actually working on something instead of just haranguing you on how *I* think Euphoria should be. At least for now. -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.
15. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Igor Kachan <kinz at peterlink.ru> Feb 12, 2006
- 545 views
Jason Gade wrote: > > Rob, can you change namespacing so that more than one file can be included > into > the same namespace? > > Here is an example of what I want to do: > > include misc.e as rds > include machine.e as rds > include dll.e as rds > > Currently the interpreter gives an error. > > Rationale: I want to use namespaces in a file that is intended to be included > by another so as to avoid conflicts in user programs. But when I know that > there > will be no conflicts within the files that I'm including I don't want to make > a new namespace for every single include. This will also help prevent > namespace > pollution by reducing the number of unique namespaces that a program needs to > come up with. Hi Jason, Just combine these libs into a single one, say, some 'misc_machine_dll.e' and include it:
include misc_machine_dll.e as rds
Why not? Regards, Igor Kachan kinz at peterlink.ru
16. Re: Namespace request
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com> Feb 12, 2006
- 519 views
Igor Kachan wrote: <snip> > > Hi Jason, > > Just combine these libs into a single one, say, > some 'misc_machine_dll.e' and include it: > > }}} <eucode> > include misc_machine_dll.e as rds > </eucode> {{{ > > Why not? > > Regards, > Igor Kachan > kinz at peterlink.ru Hi, Igor. I considered that solution as well. Thanks! -- "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection." --anonymous "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection." --M. Haertel j.