home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.tcl
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!darwin.sura.net!tulane!cpu.com!cpu.com!GWLESTER
- From: gwlester@cpu.com (Gerald W. Lester)
- Subject: Re: evalling a string
- Nntp-Posting-Host: captainhook.cpu.com
- References: <9211171516.AA26302@valiant.src.honeywell.com>
- Sender: usenet@cpu.com (Usenet administrator)
- Organization: Computerized Processes Unlimited, Metairie, LA, (504)-889-2784
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:51:51 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.165151.10016@cpu.com>
- Reply-To: gwlester@cpu.com
- Lines: 17
-
- In article <9211171516.AA26302@valiant.src.honeywell.com>, jkimball@src.honeywell.com (John Kimball) writes:
- >Seems to me this should be easy, but I'm having trouble thinking of a good
- >way to do it.
- >
- I don't think there is.
-
- >I can't simply eval the string, because eval wants stuff-stuff to be a
- >command name. If I use lindex to tease apart the top-level chunks, I lose
- >the information about which chunks were wrapped in double quotes and which
- >ones were wrapped in curly braces. As a workaround, I can define a proc
- >stuff-stuff, but that seems unusually perverse.
- >
- >What am I missing?
- >
- You could handle all of the stuff-stuff routines at one time by hacking
- on the unknown procedure.
-
-