OpenEuphoria

RE: win32lib & global functions

• Posted by Andy Serpa <ac at onehorseshy.com> Oct 03, 2003
• 485 views

I'm talking about names -- my functions may not even do the same thing 
that yours do.  Plus your way still leads to broken code, which is why I 
brought this up in the first place.  I downloaded the win32lib beta, and 
it broke some of my already-working win32lib programs because there were 
now namespace conflicts with functions I already had in other libraries. 
 And given the attitude that it is ok to "globalize" whatever functions 
you desire that win32lib might become DEPENDENT ON but aren't functions 
which are not part of win32lib's purpose, you can expect to break more 
code in the future as you add more arbitrary (& undocumented) functions.

I'm not trying to get you to force anything on anybody, I'm trying to 
get you to STOP forcing something on everybody.  Your way leads to 
broken code and conflicts that can be avoided.  My way leads to no 
broken code (in theory) and no conflicts.  Isn't that better?  (I say in 
theory because yes, it will lead to some broken code if you underwent 
the transition I am suggesting, but it wouldn't have if you hadn't used 
the generic names in the first place or hadn't made them global.  But 
sometimes you have to pay a price to fix a mistake.)

I don't know why everyone is getting so huffy -- I was just suggesting a 
sensible plan so no one will have to deal with conflicts and broken 
code!  I don't understand why you would argue in favor of such things 
when it can be easily avoided...