Re: Proposing a new if-else syntax
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05 Aug 2001 13:34:02 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
How about this enhancement to conditional commands:
Next (conditions) { false-action } true-action
This may work, but is this the best possible solution? This syntax is not
very readable and having else-command before then-command does not make it
better. As before there is still a limit to one command in both branches,
so you are forced to create small functions without a real need. It also
adds a problem of escaping curly brackets in else-command when needed.
What about parsing of nested conditional commands, braces in braces? :)
It seems that an idea of 2 commands on the same line is not very good.
I think we can already do conditional code using self modifying
functions:
AddtoFunc true_case
+ I true case commands
+ ...
AddToFunc false_case
+ I false case commands
+ ...
AddToFunc its_true
+ I DestroyFunc conditional_code
+ I AddToFunc conditional_code I true_case
AddToFunc its_false
+ I DestroyFunc conditional_code
+ I AddToFunc conditional_code I false_case
AddToFunc test
+ I its_true
+ I Next (whatever) its_false
+ I conditional_code
I know it's a bit wordy but it's probably possible to use FvwmM4 to wrap
it up into something a bit easier to type.
Here is my revised proposal that solves all problems described above.
long example snipped...
There are 5 new commands if, else, elsif, { and } in this
proposal. No existing command syntax is changed, which is an advantage.
But then you'll end up doing a while command, then a switch, then a
break and I think you've got youself a new language to learn. I think
the SCWM approach is better if this is what you want i.e. put a real
interpreter in there (I'd prefer TCL since I already know it) so that
people don't have to learn a new language and we don't have to design
and test it.
Cheers,
Tim.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/.
To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the
body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pegasus Mail
Ok, folks, I know that I have to do something to this thing. I'm using PMail mainly because all my correspondence since 1995 is kept there, plus Novell is the most supported service in our institute. And yes, it doesn't support In-reply-to even in the Windows version (at least our Novell guru and PMail translator S.Dubrov says so). And I'm stuck with Dos version anyway (because of DosEmu ;-). Well, thanks for all suggestions, and again sorry for breaking this thread too ;-). BTW, what's with *.fvwm.org? www is inaccessible, as well as cvs... ___ Dmitry Yu. Bolkhovityanov | Novosibirsk, RUSSIA phone (383-2)-39-49-56 | The Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics | Lab. 5-13 -- Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/. To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems building snap-20010806
cvs [update aborted]: connect to cvs.fvwm.org:2401 failed: No route to host -- Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/. To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CVS domivogt: * Added files.
CVSROOT:/home/cvs/fvwm Module name:fvwm Changes by: domivogt01/08/06 13:31:14 Added files: libs : fvwmrect.c fvwmrect.h Log message: * Added files. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/. To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pegasus Mail
DYB == Dmitry Yu Bolkhovityanov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DYB BTW, what's with *.fvwm.org? www is inaccessible, as well as cvs... The machine had a little hardware problem. I fixed it this morning. - J -- Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/. To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposing a new if-else syntax
On 06 Aug 2001 10:01:51 +0100, Tim Phipps wrote: I think we can already do conditional code using self modifying functions: Ah yes, I forgot, I use self modifying functions in fvwm-themes to implement a state. But I would prefer functions to be used on purpose, to define an interface with parameters that can be called from any place. Using functions to implement state variables and switch is not ok. :) But then you'll end up doing a while command, then a switch, then a break and I think you've got youself a new language to learn. I think the SCWM approach is better if this is what you want i.e. put a real interpreter in there (I'd prefer TCL since I already know it) so that people don't have to learn a new language and we don't have to design and test it. If you ask me, I would place a real interpreter language, tcl is fine. But this does not seem possible. This would require an absolutely new syntax. I am ready to rewrite hundreds of kilobytes of fvwm-themes configs, but I fear that some others have problems to rewrite their. I only suggested my version of if-else implementation (which I think is good to have anyway), because I felt it is a better solution than the two alternative commands on the same line, suggested previously. Regards, Mikhael. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/. To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CVS domivogt: * Added Xinerama support in FvwmRearrange, FvwmIdent and FvwmScroll.
CVSROOT:/home/cvs/fvwm Module name:fvwm Changes by: domivogt01/08/06 17:50:22 Modified files: . : todo-xinerama fvwm : placement.c modules: ChangeLog modules/FvwmIdent: FvwmIdent.c Makefile.am modules/FvwmRearrange: FvwmRearrange.c Makefile.am modules/FvwmScript: FvwmScript.c Makefile.am modules/FvwmScroll: FvwmScroll.c GrabWindow.c Log message: * Added Xinerama support in FvwmRearrange, FvwmIdent and FvwmScroll. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/. To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposing a new if-else syntax
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:01:51AM +0100, Tim Phipps wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 05 Aug 2001 13:34:02 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
How about this enhancement to conditional commands:
Next (conditions) { false-action } true-action
This may work, but is this the best possible solution? This syntax is not
very readable and having else-command before then-command does not make it
better. As before there is still a limit to one command in both branches,
so you are forced to create small functions without a real need. It also
adds a problem of escaping curly brackets in else-command when needed.
What about parsing of nested conditional commands, braces in braces? :)
It seems that an idea of 2 commands on the same line is not very good.
I think we can already do conditional code using self modifying
functions:
AddtoFunc true_case
+ I true case commands
+ ...
AddToFunc false_case
+ I false case commands
+ ...
AddToFunc its_true
+ I DestroyFunc conditional_code
+ I AddToFunc conditional_code I true_case
AddToFunc its_false
+ I DestroyFunc conditional_code
+ I AddToFunc conditional_code I false_case
AddToFunc test
+ I its_true
+ I Next (whatever) its_false
+ I conditional_code
I know it's a bit wordy but it's probably possible to use FvwmM4 to wrap
it up into something a bit easier to type.
Here is my revised proposal that solves all problems described above.
long example snipped...
There are 5 new commands if, else, elsif, { and } in this
proposal. No existing command syntax is changed, which is an advantage.
But then you'll end up doing a while command, then a switch, then a
break and I think you've got youself a new language to learn. I think
the SCWM approach is better if this is what you want i.e. put a real
interpreter in there (I'd prefer TCL since I already know it) so that
people don't have to learn a new language and we don't have to design
and test it.
I agree with Tim. It might be better to only implement some basic
functionality. Of course the syntax I proposed is not nice and
flexible, but it is very easy to implement. Other approaches
require that commands have a return value on which to base the
decision which bracnch to take.
Bye
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at URL:http://www.fvwm.org/.
To unsubscribe from the list, send unsubscribe fvwm-workers in the
body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
