ID:2210127
 Feb 8 2017, 4:43 am (Edited on Apr 28 2020, 2:11 am)
|
|||||||
| |||||||
.
| |||||||
|
Feb 8 2017, 5:32 am
|
|
Ishuri
 |
The only time this is really necessary is for an asynchronous proc that needs to do a callback for when it's done.
|
Please dont force people to add curly brackets for this
| |
The only time this is really necessary is for an asynchronous proc that needs to do a callback for when it's done. Not really, this allows programmers to create things that have similar syntax to byond's internal functions. Like if i wanted to make a new version of foreach that worked with our own special data structures I could do that if i had some way for a proc to take a proc as a arg. You don't have to make a new proc for each if or while or for or spawn but you do for anything you could want to do in softcode? It doesn't have to be that way. | |
callback hell, we node.js now?
| |
Most of the benefit from inline functions that I have seen in other languages only appears when you support accessing values from the outer function, which would be far more complex to implement.
| |
#define doSomethingElse(a_,b_,c_) \
{\
var/a = a_; var/b = b_; var/c = c_; \
world << "I'm [a] [b] [c]."\
}
doSomethingElse("doing","something","else")
works already, although semicolons and braces are mandatory as the whole macro body gets packed onto one line. | |
Ah. Missed the error. I guess DM can't open new blocks arbitrarily, so instead it would need the typical do-while(0):
#define doSomethingElse(a_,b_,c_) \
do {\
var/a = a_; var/b = b_; var/c = c_; \
world << "I'm [a] [b] [c].";\
} while(0)
| |
Discussions like this remind me why I love TCL as a language.
In TCL, there is no special snowflake syntax for internal anything, if you want to make a proc that can take args the exact same way an if or while or for does, you can do that, because if/while/etc follows the exact same syntax rules as everything else. | |