Re: to have labels or not

• Previous message: David Gurr: "Re: Interpreter vs hardware threads"
• In reply to: Markus Mottl: "Re: to have labels or not"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Markus Mottl wrote:

> I do not think that this is the way to go: this will just shift the problem
> of "two styles" from the compiler to the library.

        Yes.
 
> > IF -classic or -label is specified on the compiler
> > command line, one of these open statements is inserted
> > into each module 'by magic', this is a compatibility hack
> > for legacy code.
>
> But where is the difference then if you still can (have to) specify a flag
> on the command line to switch between styles?

        You don't have to. This is a compability hack.
There's only one language.

> The aim should be to get rid
> of such a flag and still satisfy all (at least: most of the) users

        The hack remains until everyone updates their code
to select the desired libraries (which now have new names).
This can be done by adding one line to every ml file.

-- 
John (Max) Skaller at OTT [Open Telecommications Ltd]
mailto:maxs@in.ot.com.au      -- at work
mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au  -- at home

• Next message: Jacques Garrigue: "Re: to have labels or not"
• Previous message: David Gurr: "Re: Interpreter vs hardware threads"
• In reply to: Markus Mottl: "Re: to have labels or not"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 24 2000 - 16:49:47 MET