[chuck-users] A modest proposal (caps)
jahbini at jahbini.info
Sun Aug 6 15:30:39 EDT 2006
To most humans, a Rose is a rose is a ROSE. To computers (who are
our servants) these are completely different, and we allow them to
push their limitations in our faces. Because, the programmer rightly
brings to our attention all the illegal, illegitimate, immoral
consequences of our wishes. Not to mention that it is too difficult
to implement. And would give rise to a race of moron babies who cant
chew their own food.
A simple hack to the lexical scanner would be to force the comparison
to lowercase for key generators. OR allow a prefix that tells the
scanner to force the comparison to lowercasee for the next word.
Probably might look like a C cast: (lc)sinOSC. This forces the user
to give the scanner a clue to when it is allowed to deviate from its
strict string matching rule. The (lc) would be a single lexeme.
> From: Atte André Jensen <atte.jensen at gmail.com>
> Date: August 5, 2006 12:54:35 PM HST
> To: ChucK Users Mailing List <chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu>
> Subject: Re: [chuck-users] A modest proposal (caps).
> Reply-To: ChucK Users Mailing List <chuck-
> users at lists.cs.princeton.edu>
> Ge Wang wrote:
>> Perhaps the way to go for now is to provide uppercase convention for
>> the native chuck ugen's (SinOsc, Impulse, Gain etc), but also keep
>> the lowercase versions (sinosc, impulse, others) for backward
>> compatibility. It's extra stuff in the namespace for now, but
>> overall that might make more sense. Thoughts?
> That sounds fine.
> peace, love & harmony
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the chuck-users