Meta-language for mxTextTools

[Tony J. Ibbs (Tibs)]

M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> This looks very promising :-)


(*blush*)

> One itch that I have with the syntax: since you are
> already using Pythonish syntax, why not simply write
>
> def keyword:
>     ...
>
> instead of
>
> keyword is:
>     ...


"is" was what I originally thought of, because I was trying to think of
"reading" the tag table definition back to myself, and that sounded better.
When I realised that I was wanting to be "Python-esque" I realised that
using "def" would perhaps be more consistent, but by then I'd got used to
"is", and also I couldn't help feeling that "def" was less clear *to me* - I
wanted it to be obvious to me that I wasn't defining a function (perhaps I'm
still (vaingloriously) hoping to allow Python code in tag-table files...).
However, it's probably not a religious issue, and may perhaps change before
things get released. How strong an itch is it?

> An alias "back" for -1 would help reading the tables:
>
> Skip back
> vs.
> Skip -1


I would be happy with that - would one bother with "forward" as well, even
though I doubt that is as often used (I tend to assume not)? Or should one
reuse "previous":

    Skip previous

which is explicit in meaning -1 (whereas to me "back" just indicates the
direction), but seems to be missing the word "to".

Hmm. I'll think on it - both have disadvantages for me, but I definitely
like "hiding" that -1 (although since this is moving the read-head it is
less important to me than losing what I think of as "line numbers" in the
tag table).

> Hmm, I guess Tim will like this ;-)


That would be nice - I bet he won't comment until some code is produced,
though!

Tibs
--
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)      http://www.tibsnjoan.demon.co.uk/
Feet first with 5 wheels...
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)