Re: Builtins [LPMOO]

• Date: Tue, 12 Sep 1995 08:53:23 PDT
• From:
  Kipp the Kidd <mcmudge@mailbox.syr.edu>
• Cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
• Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
• In-Reply-To: <199509121249.IAA04267@alumni.ccs.neu.edu>

On Tue, 12 Sep 1995, Robert Leslie wrote:

>   - refuse to program the verb, but continue loading the db

Will result in loss of code, like people that used an ascii() patch in 
the LMOO but wanted to use a LPMOO feature instead.  We are too lazy to 
port the code!

>   - program the verb, replacing the unknown() with E_VERBNF:unknown()

Without reading ahead, I think this is the best idea... or you could add 
a new error, E_BFNF?

>   - program the verb, replacing the unknown() with "unknown()"

Pointless.  You'll not only get incorrect values, but the program won't 
even get an error returned from the function....

>   - allow any unknown() to exist, but always raise E_VERBNF upon execution

Or E_BFNF?

>   - allow any unknown() to exist, and bind the function at runtime; perhaps
>     redirect it to #0:unknown()

By far the best idea.  Then maybe raise E_BFNF if the verb isn't on #0.  
This will allow you to write some nifty things that seem like builtins, 
just to be compatable with other LambdaMOO builtins...

- Kipp

• Re: Builtins [LPMOO]
• From: Robert Leslie <rob@ccs.neu.edu>

• Prev: Re: Builtins [LPMOO]
• Next: Re: Builtins [LPMOO]
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows