On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 04:54:53PM +0000, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 11:52:37AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > just a method for doing what we currently do with, say, glob or
> > >the heavy unicode things?
> >
> > None of the above. What I'm looking for is the pieces that turn the use of
> > a function into an automagic use of the module containing that function.
>
> But that *is* what we do with glob and the heavy unicode things! Anyway,
> I see your point. I shall have a think about it tonight.
Heavy Unicode things do things (pull in Unicode character classes like
\p{Ogham}) in Perl, which is kinda neat and flexible but also kinda
sucks (slow and bloaty), and the mechanism depends on filenames
(character class name must equal filename), which is kinda easy to
implement but also kinda clunky and non-portable
(\p{UnifiedCanadianAboriginalSyllabics}).
> --
> Writing software is more fun than working.
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
