Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 12:27 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> And you don't want to have him remember different function names for
>>> each argument list variation.
>>
>> Here is another premise that hasn't been agreed on explicitly. I would
>> nowadays hold that it is actually better to have different function
>> names, and have the user be explicit about what he is doing.
>
> But he is doing the same thing in each case.  It will either mean he has
> to remember different names for the same thing, or we use some
> systematic combination of function name and argument types, requiring
> the user to do name-mangling.

Right - I am arguing that having the user doing the name mangling is
not so bad. See eg. http://golang.org/pkg/regexp/ ; sure, it is
annoying, but it is explicit and simple.

>> The discussion about syntax changes is not going to work unless we
>> know in what direction we want to go.
>
> I am mostly evading that question by staying where we are, but placing
> wheels under the furniture, allowing us to redecorate when desired.
> Namely by asking the question what kind of tools would make it possible
> to create "more of the same".

Be careful with the wheels. It may be impossible to remove them in the future.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen