OpenEuphoria

RE: Block Commenting

• Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com> Aug 04, 2003
• 463 views

Matt Lewis wrote:
> 
> 
> eugtk at yahoo.com wrote:
> > 
> > --- Peter Willems <peter at integratedmoves.com> wrote: 
> > 
> > >     So what features do you miss ???
> > 
> > Structures,
> > Useful namespacing,
> > Real database connectivity,
> > Exception handling,
> 
> 
> I can agree with structures.  I think that namespacing should be 
> unbroken, if not yet at its full potential, by 2.5.  It will at least 
> solve some real problems, even if it doesn't add any more power to the 
> language.
> 
> I'm curious, though, what your definition is of 'Real database 
> connectivity.'  There are a couple of starts at using ODBC in the 
> archives, one of them mine (the other by Tone Skoda).  I can tell you 
> that one reason it was left so incomplete was the underwhelming response 
> 
> it got--perhaps I should pick it up again.  But, there are several other 
> 
> wrappers for various database formats (I can recall MySQL and Tsunami 
> record manager contributions off the top of my head, but I know there 
> are ).  Additionally, you could use EuCOM to wrap ADO or OLEDB (which I 
> think give you pretty full ODBC functionality) or straight MS Access.  
> In addition, there's (still very immature, but I can't resist a 
> shameless plug) EuSQL.
> 
> [Formal] Exception handling remains a deep dark hole of confusion for 
> me.  It seems to be obfuscation more than anything else.  My personal 
> needs tend to be met by using an object and testing for a proper 
> value/datatype--when I bother with error checking or validation at all. 
> :(
> 
> Matt Lewis
> 

Hi there Matt and others,

I just have to say that if a group of people are going to get
together and ask Rob to implement a certain feature, then that
feature should be something REALLY useful.  Something that 
REALLY improves the language.

Block commenting, although nice, doesnt really improve the language
very much, because anything you can write now that also has a
certain level of performance will still be the same after adding
block commenting.

I have to agree with structures and other C interface ideas,
because any decent program these days has to interface to
dll's of one kind or another.  This would really be an improvement
worth having.

Also, lets not forget about something like constant sequences
of single dimension for use with control structures (such as
maintaining an id list) that could be used when real speed
is needed.  If not, then perhaps in addition to 'allocate'
we could have 'reallocate' so that we could use memory blocks
to achieve the same thing (using peek and poke).
I asked Rob about 'reallocate' a while back and i think
he wouldnt mind adding it, or else making 'allocate' work
like 'reallocate'.

Take care for now,
Al