hi,

just a couple of thoughts.

William F Pokorny <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> ...
> One day, not long ago, it hit me that maybe identifier prefixes would be
> a way we could implement reasonably broad, useful constant-ness - ...
>
> Given I'm going to delay to implement a build configuration option for
> this feature, do you think some other prefix would be better? ('_r',
> 'ro_', 'r_', ?)

"democracy" eh ?! </grin>.  given those options, 'ro_' would be my choice, as
it's "mnemonic".


> Aside 1: I have still bugs and issues with the current global / local
> dictionary behavior in v3.8+ to sort... Our implementation doesn't match
> our documentation and we probably need a #top (or #upid (upvar n))
> directive alongside #directive and #local.

having read ingo's Nim language examples, I really like the "everything is
immutable unless" approach.  safe.  perhaps all macro args (as you wrote
somewhere) ought to be "ro" by default, and an explicit 'upvar N' required for
every exception ?  (that (upvar N) :-) would be _seriously_ nice to have)


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message