Sysop: | Amessyroom |
---|---|
Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
Users: | 43 |
Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
Uptime: | 107:31:24 |
Calls: | 290 |
Files: | 905 |
Messages: | 76,677 |
Hi,
I am in the process of rewriting my ALC compiler, whereby the back-end is being rewritten from "tabular" to "object-oriented".
Both types of structures have their advantages and disadvantages. The "tabular" structure is suitable for cross-object analysis
and the "object-oriented" structure is suitable for object-specific analysis.
Unfortunately, you can only ever use ONE type of data structure, so I now use the "tabular" structure in the FRONT-END and the
"object-oriented" structure in the BACK-END.
Anyone who knows TCL knows that "refactoring" TCL code is cruel, because it always ends in a huge amount of "broken" code.
Regardless of "broken code", TCL itself has some cruelties in its
syntax. Here, for example, the storage of an "array" with a
namespace path, which in TCL always has !! TWO !! commands. ONE
command to generate the namespace and ONE command to finally generate
the array.
namespace eval ::funcDEF::MkErrN {}
array set ::funcDEF::MkErrN::my {
RETURN_MAPPING {}
...
}
aotto1968 <aotto1968@t-online.de> wrote:
Regardless of "broken code", TCL itself has some cruelties in its
syntax. Here, for example, the storage of an "array" with a
namespace path, which in TCL always has !! TWO !! commands. ONE
command to generate the namespace and ONE command to finally generate
the array.
namespace eval ::funcDEF::MkErrN {}
array set ::funcDEF::MkErrN::my {
RETURN_MAPPING {}
...
}
This is Tcl. If something is that bothersome, just morph the language
to be the way you want it to work. I.e.:
proc ns-array-set {fullvarname contents} {
namespace eval [namespace qualifiers $fullvarname] {}
array set $fullvarname $contents
}
Create that once, then use it, instead of plain "array set" whenever
you want to create a namespace, and then set an array within, i.e.:
% ns-array-set abc::pdq::xyz [list a 1 b 2 c 3]
Which has now, in a single command, created the parent namespaces, and
the array variable therein:
% info exists abc::pdq::xyz
1
% parray abc::pdq::xyz
abc::pdq::xyz(a) = 1
abc::pdq::xyz(b) = 2
abc::pdq::xyz(c) = 3
%
And, given that the 'array' command is itself a namespace ensemble, you
could extend the 'array' ensemble to add a "ns-set" (or whatever name
you like) to the ensemble that performs the above "create ns - and
init" of a namespace variable, then you could do
"array ns-set [list a 1 b 2]"
in your code to replace the two commands.
1. namespace ensemble add array ns-set ::array-ns-set
2. namespace ensemble delete array ns-set
git diff --shortstat alc-new-1-lw .83 files changed, 5214 insertions(+), 5300 deletions(-)
1) but the CORE problem is not solved, for every "namespace ns-set ..." command TWO commands
are executed just to avoid FIRST namespace missing error.
→ (ALL pay runtime-speed just for FIRST benefit)
2) the syntax to extend an existing ensemble is still very "ugly.."
improvement:
1. namespace ensemble add array ns-set ::array-ns-set
2. namespace ensemble delete array ns-set
On 14.10.24 03:44, Rich wrote:
aotto1968 <aotto1968@t-online.de> wrote:
Regardless of "broken code", TCL itself has some cruelties in its
syntax. Here, for example, the storage of an "array" with a
namespace path, which in TCL always has !! TWO !! commands. ONE
command to generate the namespace and ONE command to finally generate
the array.
This is Tcl. If something is that bothersome, just morph the language
to be the way you want it to work. I.e.:
proc ns-array-set {fullvarname contents} {
namespace eval [namespace qualifiers $fullvarname] {}
array set $fullvarname $contents
}
Create that once, then use it, instead of plain "array set" ...
your hint with the "ensemble" feature was good but missing the required code.
to "extend" an ensemble is quite complicate in TCL… follow the code below:
1) but the CORE problem is not solved, for every "namespace ns-set
..." command TWO commands are executed just to avoid FIRST namespace
missing error. → (ALL pay runtime-speed just for FIRST benefit)
2) the syntax to extend an existing ensemble is still very "ugly.."
improvement:
1. namespace ensemble add array ns-set ::array-ns-set
2. namespace ensemble delete array ns-set