??? 25/10/2002 9:34:47 ??, ?/? [EMAIL PROTECTED] ??????: > >>Speaking of Sbasic... Wouldn't it be nice to avoid 'word clashes' by >>following some kind of convention? > >Interesting. I've been thinking about the same thing recently. And not just confined >to clashing toolkits. By extending SBASIC in an uncontrolled manner you run the risk of older programs not being able to run properly because the names of procedures and functions they define happen to use clashing names. >Ironically, the design concept of SBASIC to allow this extensibility could well >become its biggest weakness for distributable 3rd party software utilities. Not a problem when you only run your own code because you are in complete control. >Apart from appointing a registrar to allocate name prefixes (but then, how would you >police their use?) I can only think of radical solutions to the problem, which would involve fundamental changes to the concept of SMSQ/E and SBASIC. > >Ian >
A mechanism could be devised to rename same name extensions when a conflict exists.... Phoebus
