MOO-cows Mailing List Archive
Re: wish lists
At 10:19 -0800 7/23/96, Judy Anderson wrote:
> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 23:56:19 PDT
> From: email@example.com
> The MOO language should have the syntax of:
> a += 1;
>Ew! Please, no. Please do not rush to turn MOO into C.
>Keep it simple. MOO is a great first language. Let's not complexify
>it for little gain.
> Judy Anderson yclept yduJ 'yduJ' rhymes with 'fudge'
> yduJ@cs.stanford.edu (personal mail) yduJ@harlequin.com (work-related)
> Join the League for Programming Freedom, firstname.lastname@example.org
I would like to second yudJ concern here.
I'm not in a hurry to see perl-like stuff neither.
If there are to be synyax changed, I would rather like see obj.foo = bar;
to implicitely call set_property_value(obj, "foo", bar), so a wrappers
assignement on property assignement. (and of course bar = obj.foo; would do
an implicit call to property_value(obj, "foo")...
Same could be true for verbs call... obj:(verb)(@args) same as
call_verb(obj, verb, args)... Also the possibilities to make a wrapper for
bf likes pass() would be nice (if such wrapper was possible, implementing
passable/unpassable verbs would be trivial, while right now it's not easy
to do in-db.)
Subject Index |