Re: Feature suggestion: without keyword=
Arthur Crump wrote:
>
> > > without keyword = <comma separated list on one line>
> seems like a good idea. Perhaps restricted to new keywords.
> If Jeremy Cowgar doesn't want to use it, there is no need to.
>
It's not a matter of if John or Jane will use it, it's a matter of what's best
for the entire community. I think we need some more discussion on this. Any other
thoughts from others?
Once concern I have is the complexity it may add (I say may because I have not
thought out how it would work) and potential slow down to the parser having to
check if a keyword is allowed in this file or not.
Chris, can you speak to those two concerns?
The last concern I have is then a division in how Euphoria programmers program.
I've said many times that consistency in the language is paramount. Starting to
enable/disable parts of the language sounds very dangerous to me.
To me if you have an application that will only run on Eu 3.1 simply because of
one keyword (continue) then you should either update your application or continue
to run it under 3.1. I do not think we should introduce new parsing routines and
possible/probable? slow downs into 4.0 just so someone does not have to update a
variable name that could easily be done w/a simple search/replace.
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
