Re: [slang-users] new slang 2 development snapshot released

[Ben Duncan <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmm, not really full blown.

It does not need to worry about variable names, usage of variables etc.

I Just want to make sure the  snippets are syntaxically correct - no unbounded parathensis,
if, and loops are complete.

I think Michael is on to what i am trying to do. Basically SLAG will store the SDEF's in a 
file. In each "field" parameter can be code snippets, and in following Appgen's design,
there will be (all optional):

For Screens:

Before Function: Do this before entering the processing for the field.
                 If the "function" returns a "False" (No) value, skip the
                 entry for this field.
Default Function: If this is an "add a new record", populate the field
                   with this value. Always performed, even if the BF is no.
Key Function   : Take the entered value and modify it or process it before
                 re-displaying it. Appgen used this to do "look" up routines.
Verify Function : Verify entry is valid by key checking it in a supplemental
                 support file.
After function : Prompt is now re-displayed, now do some function processing as
                 we leave this prompt. However, if the "function" returns "YES"
                 (true) value re-loop the prompt item.

print and posting functions follow a much similiar routine.

I am at the crossroad with SLAG right now, and am mulling over several MONUMENTAL
design decisions - Do I make a near clone of AppGen? Do I throw out a lot of
Appgen and do a Informix/Mantis/Foxpro codeing style ? Does the runtime use
only the SDEF'S or generate a .sl file from the SDEF (much like FlexGen 4GL
generates COBOL programs from a parameter file).


For the record, I am an Apps programmer - been writing business programs/system's
going on 30 years now. In langagues from ALC, Cobol, FilePro, AppGen, FoxPro, CICS,
Fortran, Mantis, Alpha Four, Clarion, so I know what I want the tools to do for me,
just not sure on how to become the "computer scientist" to write the tools. But, SLAG
is far enough along with a lot of the intrensic's done, I am comfortable it is a
worthwhile project.

John E. Davis wrote:
> Ben Duncan <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > John, what we be required for s-lang to "verify" code syntax snippets.
>
>
> What do you mean by "verify"?  Are you looking for something like lint
> for slang?
>
> Thanks,
> --John

--
Ben Duncan   - VersAccounting Software LLC 336 Elton Road  Jackson MS, 39212
"Never attribute to malice, that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
       - Hanlon's Razor


_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, visit http://jedsoft.org/slang/mailinglists.html