>@hooks [
> {
> func load
> files [
> "/etc/asound.conf"
> "~/.asoundrc"
> ]
> errors false
> }
>]
>
>New code:
>
># pre-load the configuration files
>
>@elisp "
> (load-conf \"/etc/asound.conf\" 0)
> (load-conf \"~/.asoundrc\" 0)
>"
>
>I think that it is much readable, is not?
slightly. but why on earth embed LISP within the existing language?
you now make users (and programmers working on alsa-lib) deal with
**TWO** languages.
and just look at this ugliness:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] "
> (load-conf (concat (data-dir) \"/cards/aliases.conf\") 0)
> (defun load-conf-all (card)
> (when (> card -1)
> ((load-conf (concat (data-dir) "/cards/\" (driver card
>) \".conf\") 0)
> (setq card (next-card card)))
> )
> )
> (load_conf_all (next-card -1))
>"
this is just another version of the kind of embedded quoting nightmare
that we all face when using shell scripts. the right form is:
(defun cards
(load-conf (concat (data-dir) "/cards/aliases.conf") 0)
(defun load-conf-all (card)
(when (> card -1)
((load-conf (concat (data-dir) "/cards/"
(driver card) ".conf") 0)
(setq card (next-card card)))
)
)
(load_conf_all (next-card -1))
)
Now *that's* elegant!
LISP can do everything that the existing language can do, it can do it
better, more flexibly, and more generically. I can see no
justification for making them both coexist. Either do the right thing
and use LISP or continue to hack the existing language "into
shape". Please.
--p
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU
Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner.
Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission!
INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
