Roger Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. LANGUAGES AND NAMESPACES > > In my previous messages, I was concerned that languages were being > shoehorned too tightly into their own namespaces. > > But after a careful reading about "import_into", I am happy that each > language has sufficient ability to insert its symbols into the namespace > of another language (when asked to in the proper way, of course). > > So I retract the concerns that I expressed. But I still find the intent > of the spec unclear here: > > - Languages should contain their namespaces
Yes, I wasn't sure how to word that best. > because the "add_namespace" opcode seems to allow arbitrary namespaces > to be created. Maybe the strongest thing we can say is: > > - All namespaces are organized under first-level namespaces > whose names will typically correspond to HLL names That's better, thanks. > 2. TYPED INTERFACE > > I assume it's an error that both "add_var($S0, $P0)" and "store_var($S0, > $P0)" are listed in the typed interface API for namespaces. I assume > that "add_var" is the intended name. Good catch. > 3. "name()" METHOD > > The example suggests that perl5:Some::Module would return an array > containing "Some", "Module". Instead, don't we want it to return > "perl5", "Some", "Module" to match the params required by the > "get_namespace" opcode? Another good catch. This method was new in the latest draft. > 4. LANGUAGES AND COMPILERS > > There are at least four notions of "Language" here: > > (1) The language named in the .HLL directive. > > (2) The name registered with "compreg". > > (3) The name of the first-level namespace. > > (4) The programming language in which the source code > was originally written. > > Presumably we can ignore (4) because, by the time the code is compiled, > Parrot doesn't know or care what the original language was. > > Of the other three, which of them are necessarily the same? If (3) must > be the same as (1) and/or (2), then we probably cannot force (3) to be > all-lowercase unless we force the others to be all-lowercase too. I was advocating having (2) and (3) be all-lowercase. I'm not sure which are necessarily the same. > 5. THE FINAL EXAMPLE > > In the final example, what is the purpose of this line: > > add_namespace ["perl5"; "Some"; "Module"], $P1 > > As far as I can tell, the intent of the following line is to import > tcl:Some::Module 'w*' into the _current_ perl namespace, not into > ["perl5"; "Some"; "Module"]. Am I missing the point here? No, I meant to take that line out but I forgot. Thanks, Roger. Your email was helpful. -- matt diephouse http://matt.diephouse.com
