Re: class system with token filters

[Andreas Stenius <kaos@...>]

Vyacheslav Egorov skrev:
> Andreas Stenius wrote:
> > I agree with a common prefix
> Why do we need this prefix?
> You must patch your Lua to compile something that exploits token filters.
> And patching interpreter is like signing a 
> "I-am-ready-to-experiment!"-treaty.

Lets say that I find this class filter usefull and start using it alot. 
Later a new release of lua comes out, which might have a new keyword, 
class, thus causing the class filter to change and renders all code 
written for it invalid until updated. So I'd say, as long as we don't 
write a whole lot of code depending on a special filter, there's no real 
need for a prefix. But it's when the experiment turns out to be usefull 
(though still with a patched up version of lua) that /might/ cause 
headaches later on..

I'm not overly enthusiastic about a common prefix, but I can see its 
use. And of course, no one's enforcing it, it's just a mere suggestion.

I find dsilvers macro filter quite good, there the new keywords to be 
used is defined at the beginning, so you can easily change them to 
whatever *single* <name> tokens you want.

//Andreas