Sigbjorn Finne wrote:
[Regarding `performOnceBeforeMain' / `pseudoconstant':]
> - It's an interesting idea, but before delving into some of the
> more specific problems with it, is it really solving a general
> enough problem? [...] Are there other compelling, general uses
> of the construct?
Well, there's at least one other than argv: you mention it yourself, below.
> - You want to restrict the use of `performOnceBeforeMain' to
> toplevel constants only, and Phil's use of a declaration is
> a good way to enforce this.
Yes, I agree.
> - When will the init actions be performed? At program startup?
> What if your system dynamically loads code? Do you have to
> hoist these modules in wholesale at startup, or do you rely on a
> sufficiently expressive format for your dyn.libs? (e.g., ELF).
Note that it is quite possible for the language implementation
to handle per-module initialization, even if this is not directly
supported by the underlying executable format. For example, all C++
and Ada compilers must be able to do this. Doing a good job of it
might add a bit to the required implementation effort, though.
> - The construct makes it possible to express the following:
>
> pseudoconstant foo newVar
>
> A global variable...
Great! There's your other compelling, general use.
> Sure, you could impose restrictions [to prevent this]
But why would you want to do that?
--
Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
