OpenEuphoria

Re: Euphoria features

• Posted by Roderick Jackson <rjackson at CSIWEB.COM> Nov 13, 1999
• 1005 views

Robert wrote:

>     procedure foo(object apples, object oranges, object bananas)
>
>is much better than:
>
>     procedure foo(object x)
>         object apples, oranges, bananas
>         apples = x[1]
>         oranges = x[2]
>         bananas = x[3]
>         ...

???

You mean nobody just used:

   procedure foo (object fruit)
       ...
       x = fruit[APPLES] -- don't bother with intermediate variables
       ...

(There, that looks a whole lot less cumbersome.)

While it might be less efficient, and require extra
keystrokes, and run into the global-constant-problem
again, surely it... well, um, what I mean to say is...
hold on, I know there's a point to be made here....

>(Back then "object" was the *only* type,
>for-loops didn't exist, ... the good old days!)

!!!

So there was NO type-checking at all? I'm shocked!
Well, frankly I think the introduction of types
(and the elegant implementation of user-defined
types) was a plus. I really can't see how you could
verify user input without it:

   if (integer (x)) then

I won't even *touch* the lack of for-loops...


Rod Jackson