On Wed, 19 Dec 2018, at 15:16, Rick McGuire wrote: > Yes it does. That's why they are called constants. They get evaluated > once and calls will always return that value. ooRexx already has a > ::CONSTANT directive, but it was restricted to literal values. This > expands the concept to allow the constant value to be computed rather > than just a literal.
Thank-you! I've not understood all (or even much) of the discussion because the underlying oo aspects of ooREXX are pretty much a mystery to me, but I had the impression that different sorts of 'computed'ness were being discussed. If you allow constants to have computed values, how do you solve the problem of constants requiring other constants to have been defined earlier? (And also in bad code, perhaps circular refs where every one of a set of constants requires others to have been defined first)? That could be bad enough if the computed values of constants are just the results of simple (eg arithmetic or string built-in functions) but worse if the computation to evaluate a constant can involve huge chunks of code having to be executed. -- Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own. _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
