Am I the only one who would love these extentions? - Python 3.0 proposals (long)

[Douglas Alan]

Douglas Alan <[email protected]> pisze:

Just think about typing all those identifiers...

In the ol' days it was actually a semi-plausible argument that you
shouldn't make your identifies too long because you'd be too likely to
make a mistake when typing them.

Thank goodness for M-/ in Emacs.

|>oug

 

[Dennis Lee Bieber]

Douglas Alan fed this fish to the penguins on Saturday 13 December 2003
01:03 am:

In the ol' days it was actually a semi-plausible argument that you
shouldn't make your identifies too long because you'd be too likely to
make a mistake when typing them.

There was also the minor factor that, while the HOL might allow longer
(say 32 character) identifiers, if the HOL produced assembly output
rather than final binary, those identifiers were truncated to fit an
assembly pass that might only allow eight characters -- so any
identifier that was identical in the first eight characters was
considered the same by the assembler.



--

 

[Bengt Richter]

Douglas Alan fed this fish to the penguins on Saturday 13 December 2003
01:03 am:

There was also the minor factor that, while the HOL might allow longer
(say 32 character) identifiers, if the HOL produced assembly output
rather than final binary, those identifiers were truncated to fit an
assembly pass that might only allow eight characters -- so any
identifier that was identical in the first eight characters was
considered the same by the assembler.

IIRC the old Pascal (as defined by Jensen/Wirth manual) also ignored
characters beyond 8 in identifiers, though I think it allowed them.

Regards,
Bengt Richter

 

[JanC]

(e-mail address removed) (Bengt Richter) schreef:

IIRC the old Pascal (as defined by Jensen/Wirth manual) also ignored
characters beyond 8 in identifiers, though I think it allowed them.

And Turbo Pascal had a similar but larger limit IIRC.