Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Okay, here's a quick scoop and status.
*) I'd like to shoot for a Feb 14th release. Names wanted. (I'm partial to the bleeding heart release, but not that partial)
I had planned towards Feb 29th. A nice dated too this year.
Works for me.
> *) Namespaces are going to use the:
> find_global Px, [key; key; key], final_name_string
> format. I may add in a dummy:
> find_global Px, Pn[key], final_name
I'd add some syntax additions and some notes:
- Pn above is a NameSpace PMC, derived from Hash
The problem there is that there's just no point, really. Might as well not bother with find_global and just use normal hash access. Arguably that's what we ought to do, I suppose, but things are sufficiently different that I'd as soon not. (That and it's an otherwise useless parameter in most cases, which fluffs up the instruction stream)
> *) Just constant keys for names right now. We'll work on dynamic keyslater, if we don't already have 'em in.
Dynamic keys are (still) working ;)
I thought so, but I wasn't sure.
> *) I like Tim's namespace idea (prepending the language) and we'llput that in, though probably for the next release.
That's not really difficult, if the namespace PMC handles above directory-like traversal keys.
Oh, it's going to have to. The namespace stuff's going to have to be annoyingly complex, unfortunately.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
