OpenEuphoria

Re: Revised Namespace Proposal

• Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Jul 06, 2001
• 420 views

Derek Parnell writes:
> Another way of do this, without causing issues 
> with the interpreter, is to allow the "insert" concept 
> as oppossed to the "include" concept. In other
> words, allow a file to be inserted at a spot in 
> another file as if it was actually a part of that file.

This C-style raw include would be easy to implement, 
since it's just a subset of what I'm doing now with includes,
and it's kind of hard to argue against it (although
Bjarne Stroustrup himself wishes C didn't have it),
but I think it would muddy the waters as far as the whole include
concept is concerned. Beginners would see that
there are "many" different ways to combine source
files, and they'd be confused. They'd use the raw
include everywhere in their programs because it would
be easier for them to understand. Soon you'd have
a confusing mix of raw vs regular includes everywhere 
in the Euphoria world and the whole global vs local 
concept would get seriously undermined.

> Later, when you put in v2.4 when you add 
> some fancy stuff, you could allow "parameters" 
> to be used in inserted file references to implement 
> a sort of inlining of code.

We've survived for many years without raw includes,
and without C-like #define preprocessor macros. 
Let's see if we can keep going a while longer.

Regards,
   Rob Craig
   Rapid Deployment Software
   http://www.RapidEuphoria.com