Re: Dotmode etc.

From: Russell Brown (russell_brown@MFDG.COM)
Date: 05/17/02

On Fri, 17 May 2002 10:53:19 -0700, Chris Vandahl
<> wrote:

>Its not as simple as just changing the find_all_dots() function. Find all
>dots parses -one- argument. A numerical value after that argument is an
>entirely new argument. The only solution I can think of is making a new
>argument in -each- function that uses the dot method. This, however, is not
>only very inefficient, but a huge pain to implement.
Here you have summed up the whole dotmode method exists in the first place.
Any attempt at changing/removing it is going to require a good deal of
effort, especially if it involves going to a variable number of arguments.
Why exactly do you want to change dotmode? Is it because you don't like
the syntax or is there another reason?

Btw, I did not mean to imply any lack of coding skills in my other post,
just that there was no easy solution to the problem. You have obviously
given this a lot of thought.


P.S. sorry for the double post, accidently hit send halfway through
typing the message.

   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |
   | Newbie List:   |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 06/25/03 PDT