I completely agree with John Gilmore on the value and usefulness of macros. But his example is very unfortunate. Writing macros that accept the first unique part of a keyword value as valid input (as opposed to only the specified value) make maintaining such macros a pain. When the macros functionality is extended and new values for a keyword are introduced it might not be possible to use the 'appropriate' value. In this example:
> o sta, star, start, are recognized as instances of start, > o sto, stop are recognized as instances of stop, and > o s and st are not recognized as instances of either. What should happen when we want to ass 'STATUS' as a new value? The current value 'STA' is an accepted abbreviation for 'START' and it cannot be removed because existing invokers use it. So 'STA' must still mean 'START' and 'STAT' could be an abbreviation for 'STATUS'? This certainly doesn't make life easier for the casual reader of software that encounters an invocation of the macro with 'keyword=STA'. And in principle I much prefer the communication between invoker and macro te be as explicit as possible. I see no value at all in allowing the programmer to omit one or two letters (or any amount) from the value of a keyword. The time saved by not having to press those few keys cannot outweigh the readability and maintainability of the code and the macro. Furthermore it promotes the notion of 'Do what I mean, not what I say'. This should be avoided at all cost in anything related to software development. Fred! ----------------------------------------------------------------- ATTENTION: The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential, and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or opening it. Messages and attachments are scanned for all viruses known. If this message contains password-protected attachments, the files have NOT been scanned for viruses by the ING mail domain. Always scan attachments before opening them. -----------------------------------------------------------------
