No registered users in community xowiki
in last 10 minutes
in last 10 minutes
Re: [Xotcl] Very severe limitation in XOTcl
From: Kristoffer Lawson <setok_at_scred.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 13:49:29 +0300
On 5 Aug 2010, at 13:38, Gustaf Neumann wrote:
> For XOTcl 2.0, the behavior for this example is like in XOTcl 1.* (it has to be
> for compatibility for many one-liners out there), for the new syntax, you get an
> error message (... and, by default, one has to use "Car create c1" instead of
> "Car c1", since the latter is dangerous as well).
Yeah, I agree the latter is dangerous, if in a different way. Basically you can end up with really obscure bugs if you mistype "instproc" somewhere. I speak with experience :-)
Must get round to reading your papers on XOTcl 2.0. They're open and waiting for me to get round to them...
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 13:49:29 +0300
On 5 Aug 2010, at 13:38, Gustaf Neumann wrote:
> For XOTcl 2.0, the behavior for this example is like in XOTcl 1.* (it has to be
> for compatibility for many one-liners out there), for the new syntax, you get an
> error message (... and, by default, one has to use "Car create c1" instead of
> "Car c1", since the latter is dangerous as well).
Yeah, I agree the latter is dangerous, if in a different way. Basically you can end up with really obscure bugs if you mistype "instproc" somewhere. I speak with experience :-)
Must get round to reading your papers on XOTcl 2.0. They're open and waiting for me to get round to them...
-- Kristoffer Lawson, Co-Founder, Scred // http://www.scred.com/