9:49 a.m.
Would it be terribly difficult to let gretl allow longer variable lengths?
For example, function names are allowed to have 31 characters. Couldn't
variable names also be allowed to have 31 characters?
Andreas
cottrell(a)wfu.edu @ INTERNET skrev 2007-10-27 21:29:41 :
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Sven Schreiber wrote:
> the snapshot from Oct 21 crashed for me repeatedly, and it looks >
like it has to do with long (more than 16 chars) variable names >
that were entered via "define new variable".
Thanks for the report. The maximum length of variable names was not
being properly enforced. Fixed in CVS.
Allin.
12:02 p.m.
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, andreas.rosenblad(a)ltv.se wrote:
Would it be terribly difficult to let gretl allow longer variable
lengths?
For example, function names are allowed to have 31 characters. Couldn't
variable names also be allowed to have 31 characters?
In theory, it would be easy-peasy. If you can build from the source, all
you need to do is edit line 78 in lib/src/libgretl.h and change the
definition of VNAMELEN from 16 to whatever you like. In practice, it's
hard to figure out the number of places in the code in which we used the
number 16 instead of "VNAMELEN" (or worse, 15 instead of
"VNAMELEN-1").
The check is doable, but it's time-consuming, boring and error-prone[*].
Since this change may trigger all sorts of unintended consequences it
would be IMHO very unwise to risk introducing some subtle bug just because
of this.
That said, I'm personally in favour of longer identifiers, but not for the
next release.
[*] However, it would be a perfect task for someone who wants to get
involved in development, but can't code in C, since in most cases it
should be quite simple to figure out if the "16" is supposed to be the
length of a variable name or something else.
Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti
Dipartimento di Economia
Università Politecnica delle Marche
r.lucchetti(a)univpm.it
http://www.econ.univpm.it/lucchetti
1:42 p.m.
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, andreas.rosenblad(a)ltv.se wrote:
Would it be terribly difficult to let gretl allow longer
variable lengths?
Yes. Basically, it would require that all output-formatting
routines be re-written from scratch. With 15-character variable
names we're at the limit of what we can support using the current
formats, and given a sensible maximum line length of around 80
characters.
Allin.
1:57 p.m.
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Allin Cottrell wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, andreas.rosenblad(a)ltv.se wrote:
> Would it be terribly difficult to let gretl allow longer
> variable lengths?
Yes. Basically, it would require that all output-formatting
routines be re-written from scratch. With 15-character variable
names we're at the limit of what we can support using the current
formats, and given a sensible maximum line length of around 80
characters.
...which begs the question: is the 80-column limit anachronistic? Please
note that mine isn't a rhetorical question.
I do agree on the fact that very wide output is unreadable anyway, but the
80-character limit is in itself a legacy of the punched card era.
Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti
Dipartimento di Economia
Università Politecnica delle Marche
r.lucchetti(a)univpm.it
http://www.econ.univpm.it/lucchetti
2:22 p.m.
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007, andreas.rosenblad(a)ltv.se wrote:
>
> > Would it be terribly difficult to let gretl allow longer
> > variable lengths?
>
> Yes. Basically, it would require that all output-formatting
> routines be re-written from scratch. With 15-character variable
> names we're at the limit of what we can support using the current
> formats, and given a sensible maximum line length of around 80
> characters.
...which begs the question: is the 80-column limit
anachronistic? Please note that mine isn't a rhetorical
question.
Fair question.
I do agree on the fact that very wide output is unreadable
anyway, but the 80-character limit is in itself a legacy of the
punched card era.
As I see it, it's mostly a readability issue; and there's also the
matter of printability: even today, paper is of a finite width!
However, to address Andreas's subsequent question: yes, it would
be possible to allow longer names for scalars and matrices without
having to redo all the printing functions. It would be tricky
though. Perhaps after 1.6.6.
Allin.
6263
days inactive
6263
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Allin Cottrell -
andreas.rosenblad＠ltv.se -
Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti