OpenEuphoria

RE: Eu's poor design

• Posted by Andreas Rumpf <pfropfen at gmx.net> Aug 17, 2003
• 461 views

jbrown105 at speedymail.org wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 08:37:53PM +0000, Andreas Rumpf wrote:
> > > In that case, my way is easier!
> > > 
> > > x = seq[1][2][3]
> > > x = some_func(x)
> > > x = some_other_func(x)
> > > for i = 1 to length(x) do
> > > 	x[i] = ....some stuff here....
> > > end for
> > > seq[1][2][3] = x
> > > 
> > > jbrown
> > 
> > Yes, that's the way to go in Euphoria. But I think, the
> > seq[1][2][3] = x
> > command is often forgotten.
> 
> Perhaps. An understandable mistake from a newbie programmer, to be sure.
> 
> It would be better to do this:
> 
> alias x as seq[1][2][3]
> x = some_func(x)
> x = some_other_func(x)
> for i = 1 to length(x) do
> 	x[i] = ....some stuff here....
> end for
> --no need for a 'seq[1][2][3] = x' as the alias automaticly causes the 
> original
> --slice to be updated.
> 
> This alias technique can be considered close to pbr, tho depending on 
> its
> implementation it might be considered closer to that of a "#define" or a 
> macro
> (but as I have already shown the 2 arent really that far apart anyways).
> 
> > And if you look at Rob's hash.e and 
> > translate it to a program that uses pbr (assuming Eu would have it)you 
> > will find out that pbr is less error-prone, easier to understand and 
> > more efficient.
> > 
> 
> Concurred. I'm not against PBR in the language. What I am saying is that 
> the
> lack of PBR is not a difficult workaround (worst case senario: you have 
> to use
> a global sequence and sequence indexes to simulate pbr).
> 
> jbrown

Agreed. (And I like your alias idea.)