Compound Assignment Operators ( +=, *=, etc...)

[Andrew Clover]

Tom Christiansen (tchrist at mox.perl.com) wrote:

> Common rebuttals [to += and co.] include:

>     3) It's more efficient to keep a tmpobj anyway.

Bah. Temporary variables are evil!

>     4) Redundancy can clarify through redundancy.

Wossat? Sounds like rot to me. :-)

> As to why there's no x++ there, consider how often people from a
> Pascal(ish) background are confused between x+1 and x++ and ++x, and
> you'll begin to see what kind of problems caused it to be vetoed.

This is a good point, but stems from C's tendency to return values all
the time from things I think it shouldn't. :-)

I'd like a syntax like:

  x.+(1)

With the idea that x is an object (of type int) with a '+' method that
adds stuff to it. It'd be nicer without the brackets though.

:opens the language can of worms again

-- 
This posting was brought to you by And Clover.
(Sorry.)

http://radio.warwick.ac.uk/shows/losertown/