Re: More Namespace
- Posted by Everett Williams <rett at GVTC.COM> Sep 27, 1999
- 422 views
Gabriel wrote: >So, instead of changing the scope rules of "global" identifiers, I would >propose a new scope identifier: "public". > >"public" identifiers would be required to follow the rules laid out by Ralf >N., while the "global" identifiers would work just as they always have. > >Now yes, this will still require programmers to go back into all their >programs and include files to change "global" to "public" -- but even if >they don't, the programs and include files WILL STILL WORK! No code will be >"broken" by this change -- a new (and more preferable) alternative will >simply be made available to the programmer. > >Anyway, that's my $0.02 worth on this subject... > >Gabriel Boehme > >---------- >"Begin with the possible and move gradually towards the impossible." > >Robert Fripp >---------- Gabriel, I like the way you think. I haven't worked my way through all the possible contortions on this, but this IS the way to make changes to a language. Break as little as possible while adding to capability. Note other items that I think are necessary to go with this in my reply to Ralf.