From: Brent W. <we...@aj...> - 2000-08-31 23:28:38
|
>>>"George Howlett" said: > I like the current behavior. If you crowbar it the other way, how do > you get the current behavior? As it stands now, you can explicitly > refer to the variable in the old namespace (if you want to hardwire > the procedure to a particular namespace variable). I think by > renaming the procedure, you've already indicated something about its > portablility. The other way you anchor the procedure to the > namespace. You like it, but have you ever taken advantage of it? :-) I'd like to see a compelling example where you can take a procedure and jam it into a different namespace and do something useful. The other use of rename - call it "rename without behavior change" - is easy to justify. That has been used for code profiling, and for enhancing commands by intercepting them, doing something, then calling the original procedure. > I think Brent's right about working on the real problem which is an > onexit handler. Right - probably should be a new thread. -- Brent Welch <we...@aj...> http://www.ajubasolutions.com Scriptics changes to Ajuba Solutions scriptics.com => ajubasolutions.com -- The TclCore mailing list is sponsored by Ajuba Solutions To unsubscribe: email tcl...@aj... with the word UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. |