Re: [Gretl-devel] trivial syntax request for "set"
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2017, Sven Schreiber wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> would it be too difficult (or have unwanted side effects) to enable
>> several 'set' instructions on a single line, as in:
>> "set echo off, messages off" ?
A less general point: do you ever, ever, leave "messages" and "echo"
in
different states? I, personally, don't.
Hmm, No, probably not.
Actually, for anything exceeding 10 lines, my first 2 are routinely
devoted
to turning both off. On the other hand, it's clearly nice to have them both
on when teaching.
Perhaps (bar the obvious backward compatibility problem) we could reformulate
this via something like
set verbose [on | off | echo | messages ]
defaulting to "off" if possible.
The minimal, backward-compatible change here -- and I quite like the
idea -- would be to enable
set verbose off | on
meaning set both echo and messages off or on. And if there's really no
market for manipulating "echo" and "messages" independently we could
undocument them (while still handling them for compatibility).
Allin