[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The problem i see with #include is it is less powerful that our current
> system.
> With current system we can include any file we want in a middle of a line,
> which might not be possible with #include.
> mapdata="{foo.map}" is only the most usual case, but there a lot of others (i
> remeber i already used it for terrain masks, the random terrain generation
> part of a scenario (which was shared with some other scenarios).
Can you point me at some of these non-map use cases?
> I have an alternate suggestion :
> - change current file inclusion to {%filename} instead of {filename} (that
> will be disallowed) (or use any other character that would not be permitted in
> a macro name).
> This should allow macro calls an file inclusion to be different and the file
> inclusion won't loose in power...
It's possible. But it's also possible that file inclusions in mid-line
are something we shouldn't be doing, or can be more cleanly handled in
a different way. I'm supicious of this 'feature'; like C macros,
it invites all kinds of hard-to-debug abuses -- for example, when
an included file isn't a balanced syntactic unit.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
