RE: Eu 2.5 suggestions(very useful)
CoJaBo wrote:
>
>
> Please tell me what you think.
>
> CoJaBo wrote:
>
> I think the other one got lost somewere...Anyway:
> Eu 2.5 suggestions(very useful)
> Some of the following is missing from Euphoria and would be very
> helpful to me and many other programmers. I would like to see this in
> Eu 2.5. Please take these into consideration.
>
>
> "eval()" commands:
> I would really like to see a way to do an "eval()" type command.
> Many other languages have something like this.
> Since "dynamic includeing" won't work in eu 2.5 or bounnd programs,
> this is a very important feature.
>
> eval(sequence eval_commands,integer global_type,integer crash)
> eval_commands is a sequence of commands
> global_type is:
> 0-No routines/varibles (even global) exist in main program
> 1-Only routines/varibles declared as global exist in main program
> 2-All routines/varibles exist in main program
> This would help in some programs.
>
> if crash is true, if it encounters an error (like 1/0) than the
> program dies with (or a crash routine, see below) ex.err, otherwise, it
> returns an error
> code like below
>
>
> Example:
> integer a,global_type
> sequence eval_commands
>
> eval_commands="
> include incl_file.e--should allow including(This could be used \n
> --instead of complex "dynamic includeing" libraries), \n
> --and shouldn't insert the include file here when binding \n
> if a then \n
> ?a \n
> end if \n"
> --It would also be helpful to be able to split strings across multiple
> lines.
> --new lines would be ignored, so still use '\n'.
> --So:
> --"line 1\n
> --line 2"
> --would be the same as
> --"line 1\nline 2"
>
> a=7
> global_type=1
>
> ?eval(eval_commands,global_type,0)
> Displays:
> 7(value of a)
> 0(eval encountered no errors or an error code)
>
Couldn't someone work on a library to convert Eu routines to C then to
ASM then to machine code to poke into memory? Then the programmer could
use call() to run the routines. Maybe a library like this could
accomplish the same effect without a change in the language.
Watcom is open source now, maybe someone could use the Eu to C
translator, then a euphoria version of Watcom to convert the C to ASM,
then write there own assembler. I might take this up as a personal
project.
> ____________________________________________________________
> Crash callback
> A way to setup a callback function would allow programs to save user
> data before exiting
> with ex.err. Programs like Win32Lib IDE, and webservers almost
> require this.
>
> set_crash(integer routine_id)
> routine_id is the routine id of the function
> it calls the function with an error code(like 5 for divide by 0),
> a sequence with info about the error(like a line #, invalid subscript,
> ect.)
> and a text string with the complete text error message(
> "test.ex:3
> attempt to divide by 0")
>
> if the function returns -1, ignore the error
>
> Example:
> function oncrash(integer err_code,sequence info,sequence msg)
> if err_code=34 then--this error can be ignored in this program
> return -1
> end if
> save_all_important_data()
> return 0
> end function
> set_crash(routine_id("oncrash"))
I have never found a need for this, but some might.
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Threads in Eu 2.5?
> I think threads are needed in Euphoria. The example below would be
> fairly easy to use.
> Many programs would benifit from this.
> procedure new_thread(integer routine_id,sequence params,int priority)
> new_thread() starts the thread and returns imediatly.
>
> routine_id is the routine id for the procedure to run
>
> params is "params must be a sequence of argument values of length n,
> where n is the number of arguments required by the procedure.
> If the procedure does not take any arguments then params should be {}."
> (copied from manual: call_proc)
>
> priority is somthing like HIGH, LOW, NORMAL, ABOVENORMAL, ect
>
>
> procedure a()
> integer t
> t=time()
> for z=1 to 1000000+i do
> --do something that takes a lot of time here
> end for
> ?time()-t --a fairly high number
> end procedure
>
> procedure b(integer i)
> integer t
> t=time()
> for z=1 to 1000000+i do
> --do something that takes a lot of time here
> end for
> ?time()-t --a fairly high number
> end procedure
>
> integer tt
> tt=time()
> new_thread(routine_id("a"),{},ABOVENORMAL)
> new_thread(routine_id("b"),{rand(10)},LOW)
> ?time()-tt --would display a number near 0 because new_thread() returns
>
>
> imediatly
>
This would be useful maybe for doing background things such a syntax
checking in editors, while not causing a delay in showing a letter when
a key is pressed. I think this addition would probably be benificial.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>
> I would like to be able to set the value of a variable like this:
> integer
> some_extremly_long_variable_name=82,another_extremly_long_variable_name=45
>
>
> Instead of:
> integer
> some_extremly_long_variable_name,another_extremly_long_variable_name
> some_extremly_long_variable_name=82
> another_extremly_long_variable_name=45
>
> This would be much easeyer, especilly with long variable names.
> This is already used in constants, so why not with regular variables?
I don't like this idea. I know I'm one of the few though. And, I must
admit, I don't have any good reason for disliking it.
> __________________________________________________
>
> Again, PLEASE take these into consideration!
>
> Tell me what you think.
>
Just my thoughts,
Phil
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
