On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > >>  Well, lessee. The Common Lisp spec calls them "situations" in the
>  > definition of (eval-when)...
>  That's not bad.

Oh, sure, ignore it when I first said it, but let John quote me and
allasudden it's notable.. :-)

>  An offline correspondent offers:
>     "event handler blocks"
>     "event handlers"
>           "handler blocks"
>           "handlers"
>  Maybe FOO {} is a handler block, and FOO is just the "handle"
>  for the handler...10-4 good buddy?

The "handler" idea is interesting.  As a sort of self-countering
response to my earlier objection about event-orientedness, I note that
Applescript treats user-defined subroutines as just a special case of
event handlers, where the triggering event is a call to the routine.
So maybe talking about BEGIN and friends the same way is not so wacky.

I don't know about "handle" for the keyword, though.  It's awfully
overloaded in programming.  For instance, does Perl6 still have

Something keeps making me think of the {SG,H,X}ML terminology of
"elements" with "tags".  I don't think "element" fits here, but "tag"
for the keyword feels right to me.  We could just call them "tagged
blocks", but that's a syntactic description, which fails to convey
anything about the semantics.

So maybe "event tags" and "event blocks", with the combination of the
two constituting an "event handler"?

Also: a CB reference?  Really? (Y)our age is showing. :)


Reply via email to