Re: Thoughts about {*} operator



Googie wrote:
I would prefer (to minimalize obscure characters) to call:
x $#a

What we've got is not the best, just the least worst given that we have to use a former syntax error if we are to introduce it in 8.5. Your suggestion has a few problems:

1) It only applies to variables, but the official syntax may expand a
word regardless of how it was arrived at.

2) It's just a new interpretation of what was foolish but legal
syntax, and not an actual syntax error. For example:

% info patchlevel
8.4.14
% set #a b
b
% puts $#a
$#a

The expansion syntax and semantics were argued over immensely for years.
What we now have has exactly right semantics (and they're efficiently
implemented too) and syntax which doesn't suck too badly. We're not
going to reopen the can of worms.

Donal.
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Need help with Field Codes
    ... All of the braces, including the internal ones, need to be inserted by Word, ... I was able to get past the Syntax Error problem I reported ... I want the field code to be replaced by the current year plus 1. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.newusers)
  • Re: Need help with Field Codes
    ... specifically in the top left hand label. ... I was able to get past the Syntax Error problem I reported ... I want the field code to be replaced by the current year plus 1. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.newusers)
  • Re: Need help with Field Codes
    ... Word MVP FAQ site: http://word.mvps.org ... I was able to get past the Syntax Error problem I reported ... I want the field code to be replaced by the current year plus 1. ...
    (microsoft.public.word.newusers)
  • Re: Syntax checker wtf?
    ... Ruby would give you a syntax error on a multiline ... SyntaxError: compile error ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: Syntax (was: Perfrom Thru
    ... "This statement has violated the limits of this compiler" ... these are syntax violations in the Standard's definition of them. ... > whether the problem is a compiler limitation or it is a syntax error, ... >> Then not "source violates the SYNTAX rules of the Standard" ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)