RE: FW: That numeric verb thing again.

• Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 21:05:19 PST
• From:
  Ron Stanions <chaeon@roc.clawpaw.com>
• Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

----------
From:  Rich Connamacher[SMTP:phantom@baymoo.sfsu.edu]
Sent:  Monday, February 19, 1996 8:59 PM
To:  H. Peter Anvin
Cc:  local-moo@terminus.storm.net; moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
Subject:  Re: FW: That numeric verb thing again.

My $0.02 cents:

.program me:2
[programs the verb with name "2"]

.program me:(2)
[programs the verb with index 2]

.program me:((2))
[programs the verb with name "(2)"]

.program me:(:hey)
[prgrams the verb with name ":hey"]

I agree with this method, but not with your syntax, it differs from moo-standard.
For all your above examples (plus one) I would use:

                          when $server_options.support_numeric_verbname_strings is:
                            0  (new style)                      1 (old style)
.program me:2           <-- programs me:("2")()             programs verb #3 on me
.program me:(2)         <-- programs verb #2 on me.         raises E_TYPE
.program me:("2")       <-- programs me:("2")()             programs me:("2")()
.program me:("(2)")     <-- programs me:("(2)")()           programs me:("(2)")()
.program me:(":hey")    <-- programs me:(":hey:)()          programs me:(":hey:")()

Likewise with calling verbs from within a function.

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

• Prev: Re: FW: That numeric verb thing again.
• Next: Getting off this list
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows