FW: That numeric verb thing again.

• Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 12:53:15 PST
• From:
  Ron Stanions <chaeon@roc.clawpaw.com>
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

----------
From:  H. Peter Anvin[SMTP:hpa@trantor.storm.net]
Sent:  Monday, February 19, 1996 3:25 PM
To:  local-moo@terminus.storm.net; moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
Subject:  Re: That numeric verb thing again.

>In article <01BAFED5.917D3120@phoenix.clawpaw.com>,
>Ron Stanions <chaeon@roc.clawpaw.com> wrote:
>>
>>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.
>>
>
>Isuggest using the already-unambiguous MOOcode syntax:
>
>object:verb OK iff verb doesn't contain " ( )
>object:("verb") otherwise
>object:(verbno) for verb numbers

Yes, but for .program this won't work.  if I have two verbs 'l*ook this none none' and 'l*ook none none none' how can I use .program to write the second verb? (without setting the $server_option that is.)

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

• Prev: Further server anomalies w/ verb:(num)()
• Next: Re: FW: That numeric verb thing again.
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows