On 20 Jan 1998, Tim Showalter wrote:
I'm not sure I like the idea of having a block or a semicolon terminate a
command.
Just curious: why?
Ah. The idea is that if a script contains extensions and extension
tests, it's *possible* to write a script which works with older
parsers, as long as the syntax doesn't change.
Which gets you nothing when the validator rejects the script.
... except that the validator can say, "Hey, I don't understand this
command, but I know the syntax is bad; you might want to fix it." It's a
lot like the way a C compiler can compile a function call without actually
knowing that the function will exist at link-time.
With feature tests, it's possible to write a script which will work on
older implementations and take advantage of newer features (vacation, some
sort of persistant storage, a small AI, a way to access a list of
known spammers, etc...).
It's highly possible that people will write scripts which require
certain extensions, without using extension tests, [...]
I'm removing extension tests unless you complain right now.
I'm complaining right now; I really like having both feature tests and
feature requirements. (Although, heh, extension tests could easily be
done as an extension... :-)
)Rob