On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 12:27 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> And you don't want to have him remember different function names for >>> each argument list variation. >> >> Here is another premise that hasn't been agreed on explicitly. I would >> nowadays hold that it is actually better to have different function >> names, and have the user be explicit about what he is doing. > > But he is doing the same thing in each case. It will either mean he has > to remember different names for the same thing, or we use some > systematic combination of function name and argument types, requiring > the user to do name-mangling.
Right - I am arguing that having the user doing the name mangling is not so bad. See eg. http://golang.org/pkg/regexp/ ; sure, it is annoying, but it is explicit and simple. >> The discussion about syntax changes is not going to work unless we >> know in what direction we want to go. > > I am mostly evading that question by staying where we are, but placing > wheels under the furniture, allowing us to redecorate when desired. > Namely by asking the question what kind of tools would make it possible > to create "more of the same". Be careful with the wheels. It may be impossible to remove them in the future. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
