On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, I. Oppenheim wrote:
> > m: ~n3 = n{o}n{m}n
>
> Phil, thank you for sharing this, this is a wonderful
> idea! I strongly suggest to include this mechanism in
> the upcomming standard. Guido, what do you think?
My personl view is that extensions are always welcome if the make life
easier, but calling them 'standard' is only possible if/when they are
actually implemented by a large number of applications. Remember, I
believe in 'de facto' standards.
I think that m: is a wonderful and very useful extension to the standard,
but AFAIK BarFly is the only program that supports it. In my view, macros
shouldn't be part of the notation, and should be implemented using
external tools like preprocessors. But that's just an opinion. I think
I'll extend abcpp to add m: support.
That said, if all developers are willing to implement m: in their
programs, that't fine. Otherwise, abcpp will do the job for them.
Ciao,
Guido =8-)
--
Guido Gonzato, Ph.D. <guido . gonzato at univr . it> - Linux System Manager
Universita' di Verona (Italy), Facolta' di Scienze MM. FF. NN.
Ca' Vignal II, Strada Le Grazie 15, 37134 Verona (Italy)
Tel. +39 045 8027990; Fax +39 045 8027928 --- Timeas hominem unius libri
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
