RE: Euphoria 2.5
- Posted by "Ricardo M. Forno" <rforno at uyuyuy.com> Aug 01, 2004
- 485 views
Hi, Igor. What are the non-documented side efects you are speaking of? Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Igor Kachan <kinz at peterlink.ru> To: <EUforum at topica.com> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 4:32 AM Subject: Re: Euphoria 2.5 > > > Hi Juergen, > > ---------- > > From: Juergen Luethje <j.lue at gmx.de> > > To: EUforum at topica.com > > Subject: Re: Euphoria 2.5 > > Sent: 29 jul 2004 y. 22:57 > > [big snip] > > > Sorry, but this sounds somewhat theoretical to me. > > At least regarding to my personal coding style, > > this will be rather unlikely. If a sequence in > > my program is so important, that I feel necessary > > to give it a name such as > > 'First_Very_Long_But_Very_Clear_Name_of_Main_Sequence_1', > > then I probably will name the variable that holds its length > > 'Length_Of_First_Very_Long_But_Very_Clear_Name_of_Main_Sequence_1' > > rather than just 'A_'. > > Or, the other way round, if the variable 'A_' holds the > > length of the sequence, then the sequence itself will > > prbably have a name such as 'A' or 'sA'. > > Yes, agreed. > > > Anyway, I think your trick can be useful when there are > > only a few sequences in the program, that often change > > their lengths, and the lenths are often needed by the > > program. So it's not necessary always to write > > A_=length(First_Very_Long_But_Very_Clear_Name_of_Main_Sequence_1) > > Thanks. > > > But if there are say 20 sequences, I think adding > > 20 types would add considerable overhad to the program. > > Maybe. > I can not say something definite about $-overhead of the > Euphoria interpreters and translators themselves, about > the time and efforts on developing that feature etc etc, > and, maybe, I'm too conservative myself to be euthoric > about any new thing in the EU language. > I think, we all do not know the existing EU well enough. > > > > But you could not use $-feature in the same manner, > > > there is no the separate $-value at all. > > > > Yes, it will only work for subscripting and slicing, > > but for these purposes it will be more elegant than > > anything currently available in Eu 2.4, IMHO. > > Maybe, yes, elegance requires a sacrifice ... > > But old good EU [type ... end type], what a beautiful thing! > > I just remembered yours: > "And what is the advantage compared to conventional Euphoria > programming style, i.e. not using all those types ... " > > And I do remember Rob's: > "In Euphoria, types are for documentation > and debugging. Period." > > And I am afraid that some time Rob will eliminate > the existing non-documented side effect as it already > was once with the translator in "without type_check" mode. > > Well, let us wait for 2.5. > > Good Luck! > > Regards, > Igor Kachan > kinz at peterlink.ru > > > >