RE: Version 2.4 and beyond
On 13 Feb 2002, at 21:49, C. K. Lester wrote:
Note: i still don't have Robert's original email containing these quotes.....
> > Structures, classes, etc. are tempting, but I've studied them
> > carefully over the years, and decided not to include them.
>
> What detriments outweighed what benefits?
/me listens.. As much as i dislike OOP, classes *without limits* could be
interesting. By "without limits" i mean buildable at runtime, importable as
needed during runtime, non-failmode if called and they aren't there, a means
to detect if they are there or not (ditto the methods internally), allow
multiple
inheritances and descendants, and you can prolly guess all the other
restrictions i don't want on them. Basically, make them extremely useable
and user friendly, like sequences are.
> > "planning" stifles creativity.
>
> Unless you plan to create... :)
Also known as: allow expansion of Eu into areas you had not considered,
like Ai, even as a Lisp/Scheme/Prolog replacement. I am sure Khaled had
not considered anyone would use mirc as an Ai frontend, or any part of an Ai
for that matter, but we exchanged a number of emails on how i did it (seems
he didn't know all of the tricks in mirc coding!). And exec(sequence) would
allow scripted database entries, as would defining the item as a class while
the program is still running. Which would be easier for you Rob,
exec(sequence) or build_class(sequence)) ?
Kat,
eagerly waiting on Karl's interpreter to hit the user contrib page
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
