On Mar 24, 2005, at 2:10 PM, Ken Ray wrote:
And I *still* think that allowing for unquoted string literals is a bad
idea. Even though every xTalk language has allowed for it, it is so prone to
problems that if this small feature of xTalk were gone, I wouldn't miss it.
But in reality I don't miss it anyway, since I don't use unquoted string
literals myself. It's more for helping others who have mistakenly done
things like:
put "apple" into tFruit put theFruit into theSelectedFruit
and wondering why "theSelectedFruit" holds the string "theFruit" (personally, I think it should hold an empty string).
One of the compromises I mentioned was making the initial value of a container its name and drop the unquoted literals. Most traditional scripts will work. Some folks would say, "Oh, I thought that was how it worked."
In that case the above bug would still use the value "theFruit" and not empty. That might provide a clue in debugging, but might also provide more info than you wanted exposed in the field. If some field ended up with "md5HashBase21" or "nina_dos" mixed in, the user might think hmmm.
If we add to that, that the initial value is empty if declared then your style would not have to change.
Dar
--
**********************************************
DSC (Dar Scott Consulting & Dar's Lab)
http://www.swcp.com/dsc/
Programming Services and Software
**********************************************_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
