OpenEuphoria

Re: private include files

• Posted by "Juergen Luethje" <j.lue at gmx.de> Oct 12, 2004
• 434 views

Greg Haberek wrote [quoting order rearranged]:

> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:48:43 +1000, Patrick Barnes <mrtrick at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 21:39:56 -0700, Derek Parnell wrote:
>
>>> Has anybody got any thoughts about extending the 'include' system so
>>> that anything included can only been 'seen' by the file that included it.
>>
>> It's been brought up before... but nothing has happened of it.
>> Are there any technical problems with implementing it, Rob? That is to
>> say, the visibility...
>>
>>>    private include abc.e

<snip>

> Or maybe a slightly different approach: inline files. Upon reaching
> keyword 'inline' the Interpreter continues to parse that file as if it
> were in the local file, yet keeping track of separate line numbers,
> etc..
>
> inline myfile.e    -- file is inserted inline at this position

This has the disadvantage, that the local variables in the inlined file
are not local to that file any more, after it has been inlined. So
inlining IMHO might cause some (more or less unexpected) naming
conflicts.

BTW: You can do this inlining already, using Tommy's Kanarie Template
     System as preprocessor for Euphoria.

Regards,
   Juergen

-- 
A: Because it considerably reduces the readability of the text.
Q: Why?
A: Top posting.
Q: What is annoying in e-mail and news?