[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The problem i see with #include is it is less powerful that our current > system. > With current system we can include any file we want in a middle of a line, > which might not be possible with #include. > mapdata="{foo.map}" is only the most usual case, but there a lot of others (i > remeber i already used it for terrain masks, the random terrain generation > part of a scenario (which was shared with some other scenarios).
Can you point me at some of these non-map use cases? > I have an alternate suggestion : > - change current file inclusion to {%filename} instead of {filename} (that > will be disallowed) (or use any other character that would not be permitted in > a macro name). > This should allow macro calls an file inclusion to be different and the file > inclusion won't loose in power... It's possible. But it's also possible that file inclusions in mid-line are something we shouldn't be doing, or can be more cleanly handled in a different way. I'm supicious of this 'feature'; like C macros, it invites all kinds of hard-to-debug abuses -- for example, when an included file isn't a balanced syntactic unit. -- <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a> _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev