Re: parray improvements

Kaitzschu wrote:
>

>
> This is not backwards compatible. Good for Tcl9, I guess. Until then,
>
> parray array ?pattern=* ?channel=stdout??
>
> Clumsy (forces channelwriters to specify pattern) but is compatible as
> parray accepted only one parameter. Using empty channel name just returns
> list of formatted lines (true channel can't have empty name?). At Tcl9
> backward compatibility can be broken by adding true switches to [parray].
>
> Memorywasting when printing huge arrays is reduced by wasting clock cycles
> to check channel at every iteration. Diff is against 8.5a2 parray.tcl
> (I failed to find those cvs head differences).
>

Oh, I forgot about the pattern ... Yes, you are right, that makes
it less trivial. However, would it be disastrous to be not 100%
compatible:

- If an option is given, then it must start with a "-"
- Patterns often have * or ? in them

So my proposal would preclude:
- array names that start with a "-"
- patterns without wild-cards
- (and possibly only the combination)

Regards,

Arjen
Received on Thu Sep 29 14:20:03 2005