J. Landman Gay wrote:
Mark Wieder wrote:
How about the opposite? Stop using the *long* form... it means less
typing and you get the same effect (see your subject line)...
A Modest Proposal:
How about if we eliminate both and enforce just a single-character
typing convention for objects and numeric values only for object
identification? That way "field 3 of card 7" would come out to "f3c7"
for a minimum of typing.
...
<tomato>
HEAVE. SPLAT!!
</tomato>
That was pretty much my reaction to the suggest of eliminating the more
efficient form of object tokens.
I write my own script editor so it's not hard for me to make my own
replace routine on save.
But I fear for Mr. Waddingham when the citizens storm the Edinburgh
offices with torches and pitchforks after discovering that the code
style they've been using for years is no longer supported. ;)
I like Mark, I don't want to see any harm come to him.
I appreciate the relationship between the size of the token table and
execution efficiency. But does this one really affect speed? It would
seem more of a compilation issue than execution, since "button" and
"btn" could both be tokenized to the same internal symbol.
Maybe this calls for a transition from runtime compilation to up-front
compilation (at least as an option), which might open many other doors
besides....
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Media Corporation
__________________________________________________
Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
