12 Aug
2010
12 Aug
'10
9:26 a.m.
forgot to cc the list...
Am 11.08.2010 20:11, schrieb Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul:
On Aug 11, 2010 at 18:39, Klaus
Darilion<klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
I can't remember if I was for or against a dedicated concat parameter,
but now I think a dedicated parameter would be good. '.' might be
confusing as well once we support float numbers.
Is it possible to analyze how sr evaluates the term?
regards
klaus
Am 11.08.2010 17:19, schrieb Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul:
f("7 + 6 = 76") :-)
but
f("7 +" +" 6 = " + (7 + 6)) is f("7 + 6 = 13"), as
expected.
I agree it's confusing, but when I wanted to add a separate operator for
string concat (e.g. '.') lots of people opposed it on the grounds that
it will be too difficult for a script writer to use 2 different operators
(or something similar).
Now we have auto-conversion everywhere...
Maybe we can revisit this and the option of declaring only typed
variable for a future release. On Aug 11, 2010 at 17:13, Klaus
Darilion<klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
... + 7 * 6)
^ ^
| |
A B
IMO it is very confusing (if not even wrong) that A is a string
concat and B is a arithmetic operation. What happens with:
... + 7 + 6) ? Hi Andrei!
Am 11.08.2010 16:18, schrieb Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul:
> + - all the module functions can now be called with any constant expression
> + as parameters. E.g.: f("7 *" +" 6 = " + 7 * 6);
What is the result of this example?
f("7 * 6 = 42")