Namespace
> posted by: Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
> Don't you agree that a good programming language should be useful?
> Euphoria is mostly useful, except for some really obvious areas that you
> can easily fix. And this namespace iss ue is one of those low-hanging
> fruit.
I already find Euphoria useful, I'm sorry to say this out loud but maybe I
am one of the forbidden few who have never encountered any namespace issues
at all since that old constant NULL in dll.e was a pain in the arse before
namespace was introduced.
I program in Euphoria at irregular intervals, as I have to earn a living as
well but I do as much catching up as I can manage. I was thinking about this
namespace issue last night before sleeping, and I might be going out on a
limb to embaress myself here as I am not 100% familiar with the namespace
technicalities..., and this might already be implemented I haven't had time
to read the documentation:
What if you could simply prefix anything in a file, along this lines of in
naturally OOP languages this->func() this:func() where this simply referred
to the current file not any other included file... hence file1 could include
file2 with function names the same but each file would be able to call its
internal global functions without having to "include as" the other...
eg you could shorten it to even a null namespace qualifier where null equals
the current file ie (with the colon) :thisfunc() would call only thisfunc()
in the *current* file even if it had included another file with the same
function declared as global.
Then if each library specified its internal versus imported/included
functions maybe these attempts at making new and imagined hypothetical
namespace conflicts would be gone forever (as some people on this list
obviously have more free time on their hands than I do)
I'm also interested in helping with win32lib in anyway I can, Derek, as you
openly asked for help. I'm a win32 programmer by trade.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
