[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: :SUPERSEDE option to OPEN

In article <8bd6E@CCRMA-F4.Stanford.Edu>, TVR@CCRMA-F4.Stanford.Edu (Tovar) writes:
> My apologies if this was fixed in 2.0.  I would appreciate it if OPEN would
> accept :SUPERCEDE as well as :SUPERSEDE to :IF-EXISTS.  NeXT's Webster's claims
> it is merely a variation in spelling.  This is a bug which could easily escape
> even a careful reading of one's code, and might only bite under extraordinary
> conditions, such as creating a file to write out a error report.  Would anyone
> be bothered by the few extra words it take to accept both keywords?
> 								     -- Tovar

I realize that lots of people misspell this word, but that's hardly a good
reason to change the language.  Talk about opening the floodgates ...!

A much better solution would be for the compiler to check for legal keyword-
values.  In cases rarer than hen's teeth, there would be an expression that
the compiler couldn't pre-evaluate, (OPEN file :IF-EXISTS (foo baz) ...),
but it can certainly spot ":SUPERCEDE" or ant other constant that's illegal