OpenEuphoria

Re: Variable Arguments?

• Posted by CChris <christian.cuvier at ?griculture.?ouv.fr> Apr 21, 2008
• 655 views

Æ comes from a longstanding reluctance from a small group on this list to allow
coders to do commonplace things in a simple way using Eu. I ended up starting my
own fork from the interpreter.

The change was not trivial because it involves the ability to replay canned
tokens after recording them. Indeed
procedure foo(integer n=n0)
needs late binding, since what n0 is depends on the context of each call to
foo(). Since this internal feature made other enhancements possible, I called the
change worthwhile.

As I mentioned earlier, I have other thingsto do, and this project has dropped
to lower priority. I still plan to release it someday.

Long term plans include a move to an hybrid JIT/interpreted design, which would
perhaps remove the need for a translator, and at the same time the very
frustrating limitations the latter imposes on what Eu can do. Indeed, Eu has the
drawbacks of an interpreted language, and ties itself up by adding the
constraints of compiling translated C code. This doesn't make sense, I think.
Compatibility with Eu will probably decrease from 100 to 90-95% because some
basic design flaws will be eliminated.

As you can expect, there is no tiùetable for that part.

CChris

Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> 
> CChris wrote:
> > 
> > Defaulted arguments are implemented in Æ (Advanced Euphoria), which needs
> > further
> > testing before I ever release it. So, obviously, I'm 150% favorable to it.
> > 
> 
> Default arguments would be just as good.
> 
> }}}
<eucode>
> global function round(sequence nums, integer precision=1)
> ....
> end function
> 
> data = round({1.4, 4,3})
> data = round({5.48574, 3.43283}, 100)
> </eucode>
{{{

> 
> Was that a difficult change? What is Advanced Euphoria?
> 
> --
> Jeremy Cowgar
> <a href="http://jeremy.cowgar.com">http://jeremy.cowgar.com</a>