Hi Eike, On Mon, 2008-03-17 at 12:29 +0100, Eike Rathke wrote: > Hi Kohei, > > I took a short glance at the changes you did in CWS koheiformula01. Any > reason why ScAddress::Convention is used to manage the localized > separators? I'm not quite happy with that. It spoils the clean ScGrammar > attempt just introduced and IMHO unnecessarily complicates things.
Well, that code was implemented before ScGrammar arrived in DEV300_m2. So, I couldn't have used ScGrammar at the time I implemented. Also, I used the ScAddress::Convention because that was also used to switch between different compiler conventions (ScCompiler::Convention). So, it seemed natural to me to follow that pattern. Obviously I was wrong based on your comment. Of course now that we have ScGrammar I'll be happy to use it instead. > They should be merged into the SymbolsNative map instead. Sure. I'll look into that. I have one question, though. Do we still need to differentiate between the address convention and the formula convention in general? The idea I envisioned was just to use one global formula convention to control both the address convention and the rest of the formula convention (such as the argument and array separators), and expose that to the UI as well. What do you think about that? Kohei --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
