Lukas Renggli wrote: >> Now could not we have 3? >> 3 >> do 1 (ie no preference) but transform the code from _ into := >> automatically. >> It would be really great in fact > > That would be the magic solution :-) > > The problem is that it would not be clear how to parse a_1. Is it the > assignment of 1 to a or the access of the variable a_1? > > I don't like the proposal of requiring a delimiter before and after an > underscore assignment: (1) there is existing code where this is not > the case,
A small minority of code, surely? > (2) it complicates the scanning significantly, the same > token represents different things depending on context and an extended > lookahead is required to parse it, I'm afraid I'm not seeing this point. From a brief look at the scanner, it appears that allowing := assignment did complicate the scanner somewhat, but that allowing _ to mean assignment should be similar complexity and still only require one-char lookahead. But perhaps I'm missing something. > and (3) it allows that people > continue to use crappy underscore assignments, there will be a mess > forever. I can't (and don't want to) argue with that :-) I'll gladly accept "we don't want to allow underscore assignment" as an argument, I'm not so sure about the "it's hard" argument. Regards, -Martin _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
