Hi Ann/Ivan/...,

"Ann W. Harrison" wrote:

>
> At 03:41 PM 12/13/2001 +0100, Ivan Prenosil wrote:
>
> >or
> > [DECLARE VARIABLES]
> > A,B INTEGER;
> > C,D CHAR(1);
>
> or
> int create function (int a, char * b)
> as
> int x, y, z;
> char c, d[2];
> begin

...or:

create function (a: Integer, b: ^char ):Integer;
var
x,y,z: Integer;
c:Char;
d:String[2];
begin
{...}
end;

... i really did *not* want to start a "religious war" on the various language
syntaxes here (honestly, i didn't! i'm still just a lazy typer ;-)
... the key question here imho is Jim's:

<quote> Should the shared procedure/trigger
language be an independent, distinct language, or should it adopt another
language as a model, eventually to converge with. </quote>

If it were to be independant (which is my current way of thinking) then
my initial idea wouldn't cause any harm, and leave the sp lng mainly as
it is (hence my proposal).

If it were to adopt another lng, then i'm quite sure there will be endless
discussions about *which* other lng we're talking about. *My* favourite would
surely be Delphi, others (expectedly the greater part of the fb-devels)
would certainly be in favour of C, Jim would probably prefer Java...

...BUT: it would all compile into the same BLR code, right?

conclusion: [*not* serious!] : we need a Delphi2BLR, C2BLR and Java2BLR
parser/compiler plus a new sql keyword "CODED_IN", so we can write:

create function foo CODED_IN DELPHI as
(x,y,z: integer):integer

or

create function foo2 CODED_IN C as
int (int x,y,z)

or

create function foo3 CODED_IN JAVA as
(sorry can't recall that calling syntax atm... <g>

heck, all i wanted was to save some keystrokes! - but never mind, my ib/fb
tools all have code completion (dv -> "declare variable")... <bg>

regards,
fingerman

P.S. (to completely ruin my own proposal :-) would Borland InterBase support

> declare variable i1,i2,i3,i4 integer;

in their "open" source version ??
(within this century ????)