That numeric verb thing again.

• Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 11:21:31 PST
• From:
  Ron Stanions <chaeon@roc.clawpaw.com>
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The more I think about it, the more trouble I see using the numeric verbname thing is going to cause.

The first and biggest is with .program.  pre 1.8.0,  .program #123:foo or .program #123:3 would access
the same verb.  now,  in 1.8.0 it becomes 'safe' to create a verb named "3", but now which verb does  
.program #123:3 refer to, the third verb, or the verb named "3" ?   The syntax for .program will have
to change somewhat.

Secondly, a lot of verbs that work off of verbnames expect a string argument, and it's a lot easier to
write verbs for verbs when you always know there's gonna be a string argument. Now, many of those
verbs that expects a verbname 'should' be modified to deal with a possible numeric argument.

It seems more of a major overall change to continue to support numeric verb references than to
just return to the already accepted assumption that you don't write verbs with numeric names.  The 
numeric solution is kinda nice, but it introduces a whole different set of headaches.

--
chaeon@roc.clawpaw.com  -- Site admin for clawpaw.com     http://www.clawpaw.com
Chaeon - Site Wiz or K'ryn - Bronze rider,  VirtuaPern Moo   http://www.clawpaw.com/VirtuaPern
VirtuaPern MOO - telnet dragon.clawpaw.com port 9999

• Re: That numeric verb thing again.
• From: hpa@trantor.storm.net (H. Peter Anvin)

• Prev: Re: Swap in & out
• Next: Re: That numeric verb thing again.
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows