On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 23:19:17 +0100 "Adam D. Ruppe" <[email protected]> wrote: > > (yup, I'm kinda for writeln = str; because you can throw that in > without hunting for the end of the expression to put in the close > paren. >
I think that shows how different editors or even just personal typing styles can affect our coding style. For me, I'll do stuff like: str~isFoo? [Oops, that's right, I need parens around that '?:'] <CTRL + (LEFT-ARROW x2)> ( <END> ) <LEFT-ARROW> [Now looks like: str~(isFoo?|) <--pipe is cursor] trueCond:falseCond <END> [Now looks like: str~(isFoo?trueCond:falseCond)| ] [Hmm, I want to writeln that...] <HOME> writeln( <END> ); Final: writeln(str~(isFoo?trueCond:falseCond)); Probably not surprising that I avoid trying to code on anything but a full-size keyboard with a proper section of <arrows, del, home, end, pgup, pgdn>, because coding on, say, a laptop keyboard (even one with a numpad) is a huge slowdown. I'd gladly give up the numberpad on my laptop if I could get a standard arrows/home/end/etc section instead, rather than the impractical "mini-keys in awkward faraway places" they currently use for such keys. Heh, actually, case in point, take a look at my normal work setup: http://66.228.38.161/download/img/jobs-would-have-hung-employees-for-doing-this.jpg (Yes, I need to get a wireless keyboard/trackball ;) ) > > I see no reason to change the current behavior for non-@property. > > Now, for @property setters, we might use them for other > operations too. > > @property int a() { return 10; } > @property void a(int v) { ... } > > a += 10; > > should be transformed into a(a() + 10); which is not currently > done. Geez, we still don't have that?
