OpenEuphoria

Re: Euphoria vs. C and OOP

• Posted by jacques deschênes <desja at globetrotter.net> Jan 05, 2007
• 710 views

I never mentioned a dot notation

The only addition would be enum declaration

enum  {first_name, last_name, street, town}

sequence addresse

address = repeat(0,5)

address[first_name] = "Don"
address[last_name] = "Cole"
etc...

this would reduce typing compared to 
constant first_name=1, last_name=2, town=3

and those enum could only be used to access sequence elements

Jacques Deschênes

 
don cole wrote:
> 
> jacques deschênes wrote:
> > 
> > I agree with you Bill, Euphoria should stay euphoria, not becoming,
> > c++,java or whatever of the same.
> > 
> > Your exemple is a good one, but the use of strings for commands would
> > slow down the execution a bit. Global constants could be defined instead for
> > commands.
> > 
> > Improvement to euphoria should stick to simple guidelines:
> > - minimize typing effort
> > - reduce name conflict (improvement to namespaces)
> > - reduce scope of variables (related to namespaces)
> > 
> > My yesterday suggestions stick to those guidelines and I agree with Jason
> > concerning an enum decleration because it would reduce typing in accessing
> > sequence elements by defining constants.
> > 
> > regards,
> > Jacques Deschênes
> 
> So you want to change:
> 
> }}}
<eucode>
> 
> sequence holiday
> 
> holiday="christmas" 
> 
> </eucode>
{{{

> 
> to
> 
> }}}
<eucode>
> 
> sequence holiday."christmas"
> 
> </eucode>
{{{

> 
> For the point of saving typing. Is this correct?
> Would holiday be changed later by 
> 
> holiday="easter"
>  Or would another period be needed.
> 
> holiday."easter"?
> 
> Don Cole