5 Apr
2022
5 Apr
'22
1 p.m.
On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 12:30:47AM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Greg Ewing writes:
With my "no new syntax" suggestion there would be no question here -- the only way to write it would be
height = 5 * ft + 4.5 * in
I'm very sympathetic to the "no new syntax" suggestion, but suppose I wanted to know how many cm there are in an in:
cm_per_in = 1 * in / 1 * cm
inch.definition() inch.convert(cm)
Of course that's a silly mistake, but the (sole, IMO) advantage of the original proposal is that you can't make that silly mistake.
Don't worry, I'm sure it will allow its own distinct silly mistakes :-) -- Steve