proc example {varName value} { upvar 1 $varName var ...}which is a good convention for readable code. However, after a hard day of adjusting *const** references in C++, frustration with that baroque language brought me to think of other ways in the freeest language I know - Tcl. I did not want to repeat the *const** experience, but simple references can be sugared by overloading the proc command.For this breakfast fun project, I chose the slightly different name pruc ("procedure with upvar components"). It is called just like proc, with the added behavior that arguments declared with prefix * or & are implicitly upvar-ed to a local variable without that prefix, before the original proc body. Simple enough, but again a few lines of code have changed the face of our language considerably:
proc pruc {name argl body} { set prefix "" foreach {upvar var} [regexp -all -inline {[*&]([^ ]+)} $argl] { append prefix "\nupvar 1 \${$upvar} $var;" } proc $name $argl $prefix$body } #------------- Testing: pruc demo {*i j} { set i $j } puts "[demo foo 42]/$foo" pruc demo2 {j &i} { set i $j } puts "[demo2 43 bar]/$bar" puts "generated body: [info body demo2]"...which shows on stdout:
42/42 43/43 generated body: upvar 1 ${&i} i; set i $jSee Pass by reference for an earlier alternative, and use_refs
escargo 15 Dec 2005 - I wonder if you thought about a different policy: When an argument name ends in "Name" (e.g., varName), automatically insert upvar $varName var into the synthesized procedure. That would follow the Style Guide.KPV wouldn't work for me because I often have parameters with names like imageName, fileName and widgetName.AMG: I wasn't aware that this Name suffix style had been codified, so I made up my own convention: I usually suffix "name" argument names with "_var". For instance, if I wrote a proc that as a side effect would set some variable in the caller's frame to the name of an image, I'd call that parameter imagename_var. To me that name suggests that the caller should pass the name of the variable storing the image name.
2006-04-28 wdb -- why so "Perl"ish with these cryptic signs? I prefer it human readable:
proc refProc {name varlist body} { set varlist1 {} set upvarBody "" foreach var $varlist { if {[llength $var] > 1 && [lindex $var 0] eq "referenced"} then { set varName [lindex $var end] lappend varlist1 _$varName append upvarBody "upvar \$_$varName $varName" \n } else { lappend varlist1 $var } } uplevel [list proc $name $varlist1 $upvarBody$body] }Example:
refProc test {{referenced a} b} { append a $b } % set a Apfel Apfel % test a -Baum Apfel-Baum % set a Apfel-Baum % # source code: % list proc test [info args test] [info body test] proc test {_a b} {upvar $_a a append a $b }The only disadvantage I see is that it is not possible to use the argument name "referenced" with a default value in the arguments list -- which is easy to remind, and which I find acceptable.
fredderic: I liked this idea, but I liked one of the others also. So I thought I'd combine them, and this is what I came up with:
proc proc2 {name args body} { set prefix "" set magic {if {[string match "&*" ${ANAME}]} {upvar 1 [string range ${ANAME} 1 end] {XNAME}} {set {XNAME} ${ANAME}}} foreach arg $args { set var [string range $arg 1 end] switch -exact -- [string index $arg 0] { "&" {append prefix "upvar 1 \${$arg} $var\n"} "*" {append prefix [string map [list ANAME $arg XNAME $var] $magic]\n} } } proc $name $args $prefix$body }It's lightly tested... Basically, &args will be upvar'd right off, while *args will be upvar'd if the value passed through starts with the &.One potential problem with all these solutions that I've seen, including mine; I don't think any of these will handle a default value terribly well. But then, I'll be stuffed if I can think of a clean idea on what exactly to do with a default value, especially in the & case.
wdb -- meanwhile, same galaxy, some days later -- I've not only overtaken the idea but moreover, I've made a procedure xproc which is intended to be the "Eierlegende Wollmilchsau" (egg-laying wool-milk pig) which uses some three-to-five ideas from above ... too long to be really "short-and-elegant", so I can't cite it here (the documentation contains just 6 sub-topics). But, it is in productive use!
NEM 2008-05-13: Inspired by discussions on Tcl-Core related to Cloverfield, here is a page on Checked Implicit Upvar that shows a version that errors early if the named variables do not exist in the caller's scope.