On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Horrors... That looks like some MUF code I've seen (I never had a > MUF flag on my old characters, so had no privilege to write in MUF -- > MPI was available to all, and even it had some links to MUF operations > using similar magic numbers). >
Hehe. I didn't mean that it should be thus in the source code, but that some simple notation would tell the interpreter that it can make that translation in memory - at the tokenization stage, or perhaps when the function is invoked. The idea is that the interpreter can skip one step - the step of taking the name "len", looking it up, and finding the object <built-in function len> that it represents. It can do that part of the work once, and patch in the function's address somewhere as a special token - right into the tokenized source code. Parenthesis: Reading the Wikipedia article on MUF shows that it has a number of similarities to what I do today in coding my MUD - I have an extremely rudimentary editor interface (smart editing is done on the client), submit my code to the server, compile it, and invoke it - and it's governed by permissions bits. However, I use a rather better language than MUF :) ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
