[Asterisk-Dev] Function format

[Tilghman Lesher]

On Monday 23 May 2005 02:11, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
> Leif Madsen - Certified Asterisk Consultant wrote:
> > On 5/20/05, Russell Bryant <russelb at clemson.edu> wrote:
> >>Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> >>>I'm generally against trying to change the function syntax at this
> >>> point in time, unless someone comes up with a really nice
> >>> alternative syntax.
> >>
> >>I agree.  I really don't even this will be that much of an issue
> >> once we have this merged.
> >>
> >>http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=4323
> >>
> >>I believe the only thing left is to figure out a good name for it
> >> that will not be confused with the Macro application.
> >
> > I'll go ahead and agree that 4323 is probably a better way of going
> > about simplifying the use of functions. I'm not entirely convinced
> > the syntax for declaring the function calls is the best (declared
> > in an external file? gross), but the concept is awesome.
>
> I still think the syntax for functions is bad, and adding a layer of
> patches on top of it does not solve the basic problem. I haven't had
> time to put my thinking cap on and come up with something better
> either - still trying to figure out why I like the old way better...

Nobody is forcing you to use embedded functions.  If you want to
continue to use a single function per dialplan priority, that is still
possible.  Just because some of us want the ability to embed functions
does not mean you have to.

-- 
Tilghman