[DGD] Re: Function Points & parse_string()

[Felix A. Croes]

Jason Cone <jcone at cs.tamu.edu> wrote:
> >Something like that may be
> >a candidate for how to do function pointers, although I would prefer we
> >didn't use the 3.2 lambda closure syntax as it reminds me of line noise.
>
> I remember reading about that simulation in the FAQ (I think it was the FAQ,
> at least).  I looked for it for a while in various DGD-related locations,
> but to no avail.  I agree that it shouldn't take on the 3.2 closure syntax,
> but it would seem like a decent undertaking to simulate something like
> function pointers with parse_string().  I'm assuming by function pointers
> you mean the (: :) syntax that MudOS uses.  I guess the only problem I'm
> having with that is where does the actual call to parse_string() go?  I'm no
> good at visualizing stuff like this. ;)

I'm including the diffs to add a simulated closure type to an older
version of the 2.4.5 simulation in this posting.  Closures were later
removed because people tended to use the 2.4.5 simulation as a basis for
actual muds -- rather than as an academic example, which is what I
originally intended it to be -- in which the closures were dead weight.

Dworkin