>I think the do command, the send command, and any run-time >variable naming should be left in the scrap heap of history. Anthony, et al: I occasionally use all three; though my main concern would be loss of send, unless we have another method of bypassing the normal message passing hierarchy. Want to guess how many existing HC stacks become incompatible with OC if we don't support do, send, and run-time variable naming? Rob Cozens, CCW http://www.serendipitysoftware.com/who.html "And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three; Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee." from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)
- OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy Alain Farmer
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy DeRobertis
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy DeRobertis
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hiera... M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - h... DeRobertis
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk synta... Rob Cozens
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk s... Rob Cozens
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTa... DeRobertis
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk s... DeRobertis
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTa... M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk synta... M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy Michael Fair
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy M. Uli Kusterer
- Re: OODL: Prototyping OpenTalk syntax - hierarchy DeRobertis
