On 22 July 2013 14:15, Dan Douglas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Monday, July 22, 2013 01:28:21 PM Cedric Blancher wrote:
>> Forwarding the proposal. Wendy's idea to use varname.__ as name to
>> reference a compound/type variable's parent is IMO *great*.
>
> In the general case of compounds it's fine. In the case of objects created
> from user-defined types, it's far better and customary to have a reference to
> the object, and then refer to sub-variables relative to that (from the outside
> in, not from the inside working out.).

I think it still has merit for both cases. But IMO it should help with
the major issue that building large trees inside a compound variable
where a single compound variable at the base contains a compound
variable array, which itself harbours many more nesting levels of
compound variables.

The current performance of such a construct SUCKS compared to java or
python (or compared to a real Unix filesystem), regardless of the
cache David has implemented, because constructing and using such a
tree always requires the absolute variable name.
Using the Wendy/Cedric proposal of nameref parent=varname.__ to
reference the parent compound or type variable is a very good way to
(finally) introduce relative variable names top build and access
variable trees.

Lionel
_______________________________________________
ast-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers

Reply via email to