Code inclusion rework #58
Etiquetas
Sin etiquetas
aerscript
bug
duplicate
enhancement
help wanted
idea
question
won't fix
Sin Milestone
No asignados
1 participantes
Notificaciones
Fecha de vencimiento
Sin fecha de vencimiento.
Dependencias
No se han establecido dependencias.
Referencia: aerscript/Aer#58
Cargando…
Referencia en una nueva incidencia
No se ha proporcionado una descripción.
Eliminar rama "%!s(<nil>) "
Eliminar una rama es permanente. Aunque la rama eliminada puede continuar existiendo durante un corto tiempo antes de que sea eliminada, en la mayoría de los casos NO PUEDE deshacerse. ¿Continuar?
Actually, we got 2 builtin function: include() and require(). Both of them are available only inside methods body. The proposition is to:
Thus 'include()' would be still a builtin function, while 'require' would become a language construct. Having that, 'include()' should allow to include code several times (i.e. in loop), while require should work as 'require_once'.
Additionally, 'import()' allows to load a shared AerScript module. Actually it is implemented as a built-in function returning TRUE on success, or FALSE otherwise. This gives the control to the software developer on potential fallback or throwing an exception it module is not available, when called from constructor for example. If we decide to rewrite it as language construct it would need to throw exception without ability to catch it from global scope.
Decision? I vote for having 'include()' and 'import()' builtin methods and 'require' language construct.