[APROG] $local (was Re: Suggestion, re: Minimal.db)

• Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 14:54:12 PST
• From:
  rgodard@divsun.unige.ch (Richard Godard)
• Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 12:16 12/1/95, Bill Garrett wrote:
>> are still essential. I was thinking of generalizing the use of $local and a
>> & prefix. The idea would be that every programmer could @local-corify
>> mygeneric as myfoobar. You would then have   &myfoobar == $local.myfoobar
>> == mygeneric. The trick is to change set_verb_code so and eval so that they
>> do the &myfoobar -> $local.myfoobar conversion and to have verb_code do the
>> $local.myfoobar -> &myfoobar conversion.
>> Any regexp wiz interested?
>
>$local is very often the dumping ground for such objects; there's just no
>commonly-accepted standard for this practice, though.  Short of telling
>everyone to port from one single MOO, it will come down to object numbers
>in the end I think.  Yr right, it is a standards problem.

Then should we work on a standard solution ?

I was thinking of & as a prefix character because I'm used to it (which is
obviously the less logical reason of using it :-) There are probably better
candidate, like ^ or _
Any suggestions?
What would be the best prefix to avoid conflicts with existing code?

Janus

• Re: [APROG] $local (was Re: Suggestion, re: Minimal.db)
• From: Bill Garrett <bill@yeehaw.com>

• Prev: Re: [APROG] $local
• Next: Re: [APROG] $local (was Re: Suggestion, re: Minimal.db)
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows