Martin Rubey wrote:
>
> >> 4) Underscore before letter will be significant in identifier
> >> name. That is 'important' and 'import_ant' will be
> >> different identifiers.
>
> I'd rather have no underscores in identifiers. i.e., I'm against this
> change. _ should allways be the escape character, in my opinion.
>
You can have have underscores in identifiers _now_. Just current
semantics is bad: currently you may get unexpected clashes
because single underscore are ignored in comporison.
And underscore will continue to be escape -- the planned change
simply will simply prevent clashes between escaped and unescaped
identifiers (if both are legal).
To put it differently: current semantics is of little use and
surprising to people knowing other languages. For them
current behaviour looks like a bug. Given that it is possible
to fix this I do not see why insist of current broken
behaviour -- if _you_ do not want underscores do not use then.
But insiting that other folks do not use underscores is
just first step to convince them that they should not use
Spad at all.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[email protected]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en.
