[217] in Coldmud discussion meeting

Re: consistency in match_template

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Thu Apr 28 17:28:17 1994 )

To: coldstuff@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 28 Apr 1994 13:33:48 PDT."
             <199404282033.NAA10934@netcom.com> 
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 16:20:01 -0500
From: Erik Ostrom <eostrom@pepperoncini.gac.edu>

I was going to remark on this:

> Consistency is required for a decent user interface, and simply saying
> "they'll figure it out" is not good enough because they shouldn't have
> to if it's properly done in the first place.

I was going to say something about how slavish devotion to consistency
can get you in trouble, but then I decided it was moot when I read
this:

> match_template(template, string, quote-char, quote-handling, field-handling)
> 
> where quote-char is a single-char string (specifying which char
> should be used in the place " is used currently) or a double-char
> string (specifying an open-close pair), quote-handling is a symbol
> specifying whether quotes are transparent (removed from output),
> passed thru intact, etc. and field-handling specifies whether quotes
> denote field breaks and whether quoted portions can match keywords
> as well as wildcards, etc.

Wow.  I can't even think of anything to say.

Imagine if, each time you wanted to do something, you had to stop and
remember which 4-tuple of quoting semantics the command you're
thinking of uses.  Staggering.