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:
Am 11.08.2010 17:19, schrieb Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul:
On Aug 11, 2010 at 17:13, Klaus
Darilion<klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
>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")
... + 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) ?
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.
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?