On Thursday 16 May 2013 21:53:34 Mark Miesfeld wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:45 PM, J. Leslie Turriff
> <jlturr...@centurytel.net
>
> > wrote:
> >
> > On 2013-05-16 10:51:18 Mark Miesfeld wrote:
> > > Staffan,
> > >
> > > You are misunderstanding here.
> > >
> > > Class B is private, it is not seen in any other file than b.cls. If
> > > you require the b.cls file, that's fine. But, any other file that
> > > requires b.cls will only see the public stuff in b.cls. The other file
> > > will not
> >
> > see
> >
> > > anything private in b.cls
>
> ...
>
> > It confused me, too. The term "containing Rexx program" does not
> > mean the
> > same thing to me as "any other file".
>
> Les,
>
> I used the term "any other file" here because Staffan's specific example
> was using files. That, to me, kept the discussion more concrete.
>
> But this it what it says about ::requires:
>
> The ::REQUIRES directive specifies that the program requires access to the
> classes and objects of
> the Rexx program programname.
> ...
> The string or symbol programname can be any string or symbol that is valid
> as the target of a CALL instruction
>
> So, b.cls the file, is clearly valid as the target of a CALL instruction.
> It contains valid Rexx code that defines a class. However, since that
> validly defined class is marked as PRIVATE, it will not be seen in whatever
> Rexx executable code "requires" it.
>
> I would not consider a file containing
>
> > only class definitions as a program, but just a collection of code to be
> > used
> > by a program.
>
> But, it is a valid target of a CALL instruction. And, it contains valid
> Rexx code that defines classes. Whether you refuse to call it a program or
> not.
>
> > Such a file could not be executed on its own, so is not a
> > program.
>
> But, it can be executed on its own. It doesn't produce any output. But
> neither does it raise any errors when the interpreter executes it.
>
> > Seems to me the rule should be talking about definitions in
> > _files_ external
> > to the program, since it appears to be file oriented, not scope oriented.
>
> Files are not the _only_ things that are valid targets of a CALL
> instruction. So, it would be a mistake to restrict it to files.
>
> I talked about files here because Staffan's example was limited to some
> specific files.
>
> --
> Mark Miesfeld
Okay.
Leslie
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete
security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and
efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls
from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-users mailing list
Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
