Ron Parker wrote:
> 
> Or, using the syntax I proposed,
> 
> #static (start, end)
> #include "filename"
> #end

True. Three lines instead of one isn't going to make a significant 
difference to parsing, although it's slightly more trouble to type,
so the above would give almost identical results -- *if* the end 
user applies it correctly. 

I only mentioned it as a supplement to #include (analogous to the 
way #local is a specialized supplement to #declare) because problems 
with making it a #static block were brought up. As an alternative 
to #include, there'd be no block, and users would have to
externalize the static info to a separate file because... that's 
just the way it works. 

Whereas, if you require the user to set up a #static block with an 
embedded #include in it, sure as there's rain you'll have people 
who skip the #include and just stuff hundreds of lines of code 
between #static and its corresponding #end and complain that it 
isn't making the kind of difference they think it ought to (and
Warp will have to add something new to the VFAQ). As much as I 
hate "protect them from their own stupidity" style programming... 

Well, I'm a scene coder, not a programmer. I only mention it 
in passing, FWIW. 


Charles
-- 
http://www.enter.net/~cfusner
"...Then darkness took me, and I strayed out of thought and time,
 and I wandered far on roads that I will not tell..." 
                              -The Two Towers, JRR Tolkien

Post a reply to this message