On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Well, lessee. The Common Lisp spec calls them "situations" in the
> > definition of (eval-when)...
>
> That's not bad.
Oh, sure, ignore it when I first said it, but let John quote me and
allasudden it's notable.. :-)
> An offline correspondent offers:
>
> "event handler blocks"
> "event handlers"
> "handler blocks"
> "handlers"
>
> Maybe FOO {} is a handler block, and FOO is just the "handle"
> for the handler...10-4 good buddy?
The "handler" idea is interesting. As a sort of self-countering
response to my earlier objection about event-orientedness, I note that
Applescript treats user-defined subroutines as just a special case of
event handlers, where the triggering event is a call to the routine.
So maybe talking about BEGIN and friends the same way is not so wacky.
I don't know about "handle" for the keyword, though. It's awfully
overloaded in programming. For instance, does Perl6 still have
FILEHANDLES?
Something keeps making me think of the {SG,H,X}ML terminology of
"elements" with "tags". I don't think "element" fits here, but "tag"
for the keyword feels right to me. We could just call them "tagged
blocks", but that's a syntactic description, which fails to convey
anything about the semantics.
So maybe "event tags" and "event blocks", with the combination of the
two constituting an "event handler"?
Also: a CB reference? Really? (Y)our age is showing. :)
--
Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
