[Python-ideas] Technical possibilities for a syntax [was: Reverse assignment operators ...]

[Mikhail V]

On 18 November 2016 at 01:26, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:


Sorry, just for a second one more comment to your comment.
BTW, Steve, there is no any "battle", only peace and pleasure.
And exchange of knowledge and opinions of adult intelligents.

> Mikhail, you are missing the point that people have already spent
> decades thinking about "a better syntax for in-place stuff", and for
> Python that syntax is augmented assignment.

Wikipedia says they are all the same in all languages. Probably
you meant something else. But if there are alternatives, I
would look into it. Especially if they are a product of "decades"
of work of titans of typography, this must be something divinely
beautiful in contrast to current ones.


> [...]
>> WAS:
>> Binary_mask += numpy.sum(B, C)
>>
>> NEW:
>> 1). prefix keyword approach examples:
>>
>> incal  Binary_mask + numpy.sum(B, C)
>> inc    Binary_mask + numpy.sum(B, C)
>> calc   Binary_mask + numpy.sum(B, C)
>> exec   Binary_mask + numpy.sum(B, C)


> [...] not one of those examples makes it
> clear that this is an assignment.

But is it not because you see it first time in your life?
That is just one point on the problem of judgement of syntax,
regardless of what it be.

> Augmented assignment does make it clear: it uses a variation on the =
> binding operator. (Its not actually an operator, but for lack of a
> better name, I'll call it one.) It follows the same basic syntax as
> regular assignment:
>
>     target = expression
>
> except that he augmented operator is inserted before the equals sign:
>
>     target -= expression
>     target += expression
>     target *= expression

Which makes these two lines:

target -= expression
target = expression

Quite similar visually but with *absolutely* different meaning.

Steven, you always give reviews and advices which exceed all expectations
in quality and clearness and I learned a lot from you, serious.
But I dare me a light nitpick: probably syntaxes is not your element ;)


Mikhail