Is it just Syntactic Sugar ?

[Ben Wolfson]

On Thu, 01 Jun 2000 02:48:55 GMT, cjc26 at nospam.cornell.edu (Cliff
Crawford) wrote:

>* Eric Hagemann <ehagemann at home.com> menulis:
>| At the risk of pushing on what seems to be a good idea let's not forget
>| the 'other "and becomes" operators as well (*=,/=,>>=,<<=...... etc)
>
>These don't really make sense for non-numeric classes.  For example,
>what would *= used on lists do?  You could say that l *= n is equivalent
>to l = l * n, but is that really useful?  I've never seen or used such a
>construct before.

They don't have to be defined for non-numeric classes, the way * is
defined for lists currently but / isn't.

-- 
Barnabas T. Rumjuggler

I foresee that man will each day resign himself to new abominations,
and that soon only bandits and soldiers will be left.
 -- Jorge Luis Borges, "The Garden of the Forking Paths"