So farewell then clunky borders ?
1 post
• Page 1 of 1
So farewell then clunky borders ?
Q0: Would anyone object if I simplified the display function in dfns.dws by retiring the optional left argument, (default 1) which allows clunky borders?
This would mean that display would become monadic (ignoring any left argument) and always produce smooth borders.
Clunky borders were popular in the old days when printers couldn't manage box-drawing characters. Of course, if you have a copy of display in your app, which relies on clunky borders, it won't change unless you replace your old display function with the new one. Plus, I have no plans to change DISPLAY in display.dws, so that will continue to be available to clunk if desired.
Q1: I would like to remove the clunky option from disp too. This is slightly more awkward as it's the second option in a left argument vector of up to 4 items. I could either remove the option, which would mean that people would have to change the left argument vector in the calling line if they're specifying a 3rd or 4th option, or I could leave it in place and just ignore it. Any preferences? Again, nothing will change in your app unless you replace its copy of disp.
If no-one objects by this time tomorrow, I'll assume we're all cool with the changes and go ahead.
John
http://dfns.dyalog.com/n_display.htm
http://dfns.dyalog.com/n_disp.htm
0 1 display¨ 'clunky' 'smooth'
.→-----. ┌→─────┐
|clunky| │smooth│
'------' └──────┘
This would mean that display would become monadic (ignoring any left argument) and always produce smooth borders.
Clunky borders were popular in the old days when printers couldn't manage box-drawing characters. Of course, if you have a copy of display in your app, which relies on clunky borders, it won't change unless you replace your old display function with the new one. Plus, I have no plans to change DISPLAY in display.dws, so that will continue to be available to clunk if desired.
Q1: I would like to remove the clunky option from disp too. This is slightly more awkward as it's the second option in a left argument vector of up to 4 items. I could either remove the option, which would mean that people would have to change the left argument vector in the calling line if they're specifying a 3rd or 4th option, or I could leave it in place and just ignore it. Any preferences? Again, nothing will change in your app unless you replace its copy of disp.
If no-one objects by this time tomorrow, I'll assume we're all cool with the changes and go ahead.
John
http://dfns.dyalog.com/n_display.htm
http://dfns.dyalog.com/n_disp.htm
- JohnS|Dyalog
1 post
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Functional Programming
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group