Re: Enhancements to the include system

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Replying to both Pete and Chris

>
> posted by: Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk>
>
> CChris wrote:
> >=20
> > I wrote in some detail about enhancements I plan to make to the current=

> > include system. This appears on the relevant  EuWiki page in the
> > "Requested functionalities" category as solution #2.
> If talking about with package=myLib: var1, proc_xyz,... friend, share,=

> restrict, redefine, then imo completely the wrong approach, see
> my comments (3 * "||" markers) on that page.
>
> Regards,
> Pete
>
>

Complicated? Well the issue of global collision is complicatd, and my
perception is that you need several separate techniques to deal with
different situations. This involves defining more keywords or
constructs, since they are more specialised.=20

Pete: I'll have to study your solution more thoroughly, but what I have
seen looked half baked to me, ie creating some confusion of its own and
leaving some parts of the problem unresolved.

Chris: this could be one of the few issues where concurrent versions may
coexist for a while, with the user base either choosing one or pushing
for a merger. More efort, but the end result could be a far easier to
use language.

CChris

--
=20=20
  cchris005 at fastmail.fm

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different=85

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu