Eyal Lotem wrote: > By the way, the "real" problem here is referencing by name, rather than > using "true" references. Which is the result of using a textual language. > The "real" solution would be to store real-references to the function and > only present the name in a graphical interface.
There is a problem with this attitude (to which I used to subscribe). Just as what constitutes a mathematical proof is a social agreement among mathematicians, programmers need to be able to read programs by other programmers. People do not communicate in data structures. I worked with LML, a lazy ML variant that (among other things) allowed specification of the print form of structures. I wound up debugging (for a nasty 12 hours) a program which printed identically to the correct program, but was not, in fact, the correct program. That one experience has convinced me that programs are defined in print, not structures. --Scott David Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
