OpenEuphoria

Re: private include files

• Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at yahoo.com> Oct 12, 2004
• 405 views

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.
> 
> For example, if we have ...
> 
>    private include abc.e
> 
> then only the file that has that line can see the 'globals' that are
> defined inside "abc.e". So if another file wants to see them they also
> have to explictly include "abc.e".  Further more, if "abc.e" has
> already been included without the private qualifier, that will no cause
> any conflicts.
> 
> This is just a quick spur-of-the-moment thought, so it probably has
> got issues with it.
> 
> It would certainly help me with many of the projects I'm working on.

This actually sounds like it should be really easy to implement on top
of the namespace improvements that Rob is adding for 2.5--see my 
modified interpreter.  It only tries to resolve conflicts, but considers
also indirectly included files.  I would think that adding something like
'include private' should allow Rob to flag the file, and just alter the
namespace search tree.

The only real benefit I see from this is not having included files in 
libraries polluting the user's namespaces, which could definitely be 
important for when two libraries have conflicting names in lower level
includes.

Matt Lewis