1. Re: we need official libs : Swap
I have to disagree here. I think that placing a sequence on the LH side of the
expression is a very natural thing to do. Just ask anyone who works with
matrices or linear algebra.
------------------------------------------
Brett Pantalone, ERICSSON INC.
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina USA
MailTo:Brett.Pantalone at Ericsson.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roderick Jackson [SMTP:rjackson at CSIWEB.COM]
> Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 5:39 PM
> To: EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU
> Subject: Re: we need official libs : Swap
>
> Boehme, Gabriel wrote:
> [...]
> >>I'd think we're better off keeping things pretty much the way they are,
> >>adding functions as necessary rather than new syntax. 
> >
> >+= -= *= /= &=
>
> AAAAH! Back, you!
>
> Seriously, I realize those were added, but I was one of the few who saw it
> as being an unnecessary degradation of the language. (I know, I know,
> "efficiency first". But really, if I was concerned enough about Euphoria's
> efficiency to worry about the speed gains in a statement like "x = x + 1"
> over "x += 1" (if any), I doubt I'd be using it.)
>
> >>(And incidentally, since a swap function is clearly un-Euphoric, I'd say
> >>we're probably better off without it...)
> >
> >If you're merely referring to code like "swap(a,b)", then I'd agree with
> >you. But I'd certainly rather code "{a,b}={b,a}" than "junk=a a=b b=junk",
> >wouldn't you?
>
> Yes, I had been referring to it as a function ("swap(a,b)").
>
> I'll admit though, the latter example of the alternatives does look junky
> (pardon the pun.) But honestly, I haven't decided. "{a,b}={b,a}" looks almost
> alluring, but some part of my being cries out at the apparent placement of a
> sequence on the left side of an assignment. Multiple assignment of some sort
> ("a,b,c = 1" or "a,b,c = 1,2,3") might be desireable, but I think whatever
> construct embodies the idea should NOT make use of the sequence brackets for
> delimiters.
>
>
> Rod
