On 2014-03-05 01:46, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 04Mar2014 17:23, David Mertz firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Cameron Simpson email@example.com wrote:
On 04Mar2014 17:57, Ryan Gonzalez firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Only problem is that it looks a tad perlish...Of shellish.
But worse, does nothing even remotely loke what that does in perl or shell (or basic or...).
I think I could be +0 for a bit different spelling that *is* actually shell-ish. I.e. as a way to handle snippets, this doesn't seem so bad:
foo = 1 a = $(foo + 1)
Definitely nicer. Still irrationally uncomfortable about the "$" though.
A thought, though it could break existing code (and nested tuples, alas):
a = (( foo + 1 ))
That's not a tuple. It's equivalent to:
a = foo + 1