Re: base-spec issue #1: character escapes

["Mark E. Mallett" <mem@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 10:26:13PM +0100, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 15:34 -0500, Mark E. Mallett wrote:
> > If you're saying that an extension can change the way these escapes are
> > interpreted, then you are saying that "require" can change the lexical
> > input process (at least for implementations that process the quoted
> > strings in this way).  I don't think that's a good thing.  The way
> > extensions are specified allows "require" to be processed as a
> > runtime directive (unless I'm all wet on that).
> 
> depends on what you mean by "runtime directive".

Something that is processed at execution time as opposed to compile time
or, say, as a preprocessor directive outside of the compile/execution
process (which would be the place to affect lexical interpretation).


>    The require command, if present, MUST be used before anything other
>    than a require can be used.  An error occurs if a require appears
>    after a command other than require.

Yep.  Speaks to the ordering but not the processing (much like
the fact that "else" can only follow an "if" or "elsif").

(Personally I would be happier if the ordering rule for "require"
were relaxed.)

mm