[E-Lang] down with `define' (was: newbie syntax: picayune points from a prejudiced programmer)

[Mark S. Miller]

At 09:46 AM Friday 3/2/01, Marc Stiegler wrote:
>> I'm finding it strange that you are so wed to the word "new".
>
>As explained at length in earlier email, the original adoption of the
>current "new" convention is the only reason I'm still involved with this
>effort.

MarcS, doesn't your suggested convention of writing

    def newThing(...) :any {
        def thing {
            ...
        }
    }

adequately address the issue, except for the "what if newThing needs 
multiple (constructor) methods?" issue?  I'm not belittling this last issue. 
I just want to know if there's anything else before taking this last one on.

I'm really not inclined to mess around with substituting "new" for "run" as 
the default message name.  I think I'd turn single method object definition 
back on first.


        Cheers,
        --MarkM