[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2005/04/10]
> "Adding a build step for a preprocessor would be clunky and artificial." "If that's too hard, then hide it, make it automatic, like it is in C." > Or maybe I'm not understanding how it would remain a single build/run step When you build a new version of the website, you add this step after you check the pages out of CVS. If your code is just randomly edited raw HTML, then server-side includes. > > This stuff has to exist OUTSIDE the eval loop. Putting it IN the eval loop > > would prevent Javascript from being usable as anything but a scripting > > language, ever, and it's too good for that. > Assuming by "compiler" you mean "translate to machine-code"... By "compiler" I mean "anything that creates a non-volatile parsed form of the code, this avoiding a trip through eval next time it's run." > The compiler can do a pre-processing pass replacing uses of include() with Not unless "include" is defined as part of the language, because I may be referring to "myobject.include" which has nothing to do with including source code. > PS Somebody earlier had said that JavaScript does not have I/O. > http://www.njs-javascript.org/manual/js_2.html#SEC50 > http://www.njs-javascript.org/manual/js_2.html#SEC51 > Apparently its a Netscape feature that didn't make it into EMCAscript. Good, this is a low-level OS-specific library. This isn't <stdio.h>, this is <unistd.h>.There's stuff above here
Generated at 12:00 on 12 Apr 2005 by mariachi 0.52