> I don't know what the right tradeoff is here. I think the disuse of
> (expr ) equivalents in Lisp is largely a matter of poor integration
> with the language; the notation is ugly and verbose, whatever the
> advantages of its contents. People wouldn't use it in Tcl or sh
> either if they had any choice. But something as simple as spelling it
> with fewer characters might solve the problem...
Somewhat like this?
> echo $((3+4*5))
23
Also, just ran across:
<http://www.elf.org/etc/tcl-expr-patch.html>
> So, 294 lines of patch and we have an expr command with
> expressions that:
> + look like C expressions,
> + work like C expressions,
> + don't need to be quoted to evaluate correctly,
> + don't need to be quoted to compile efficiently,
> + autoload math functions,
> + evaluate expressions in function call argument lists
> without explicit calls to expr,
-Dave
