[ZPT] Re: v2 of Path Prefixes in CVS
Charlie Clark
charlie at begeistert.org
Tue Sep 16 10:15:23 EDT 2003
On 2003-09-13 at 01:25:52 [+0000], Evan Simpson wrote:
> Minor brainstorm -- you may hate it or love it.
>
> Someone (Fergal?) suggested adding parens to the 'call:' prefix syntax.
> I have to admit that "here/method/call:(x, y)" looks better to me than
> plain "here/method/call:x, y". It occurred to me that we could do
> "better".
I think it might have be me actually as I really don't get these prefixes.
> Suppose we allow prefixed path segments to have the form ":Xarg", where X
> is a punctuation character (other than '/', of course). This would refer
> to a prefix named 'X' with argument 'arg' -- that is, in the expression
> "here/:#foo" the prefix is '#', in "here/?bar" it is '?', and in
> "here/method/:(x, y)" it is '('!
>
> With this capability, we could define the following (the prefix
> implementation can enforce the matching delimiter in the first three
> cases):
>
> ":(x, y)" == "call:x,y"
> ":{k}" == "key:k"
> ":[1]" == "index:1"
> ":=x" == "var:x"
>
> Too weird? Too Perlish? Well, at least it's out of my head.
Written like that it looks fine. I won't join Chris' literate criticism but
what I personally need are examples of real world code using the various
alternatives. Shane threw in a few samples to make my head spin and reach
for sick bag where the prefix (at least the I think the punctuation is the
prefix) is variable. Maybe a stupid question but why should such prefixes
be variable. Second stupid question: while the four lines above look nice
to someone like me who's happy to insist that TAL is quintessentially
Pythonic, I thought there was supposed to decoupling.
Sorry for my lack of understanding.
Charlie
More information about the ZPT
mailing list