larry cowan wrote:

[...]
> Is a $ inside [] the same everywhere?

Not to forget those who use overloading with opIndex and OpSlice. Now overloading with opDollar is a must. But is tehre always sense in it?

So long.

no, opDollar is no must. if the object has a .length property, then opDollar just returns that value. and thats it.

don't make it too generic when you don't want it to be..

"Manfred Nowak" <svv1999@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:c12o1v$odi$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> larry cowan wrote:
>
> [...]
> > Is a $ inside [] the same everywhere?
>
> Not to forget those who use overloading with opIndex and OpSlice. Now overloading with opDollar is a must. But is tehre always sense in it?
>
> So long.

i have it here.. it's altgr-^

"Roberto Mariottini" <Roberto_member@pathlink.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:c12i6v$dl1$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> In article <c12eth$79s$1@digitaldaemon.com>, J Anderson says...
> >
> [...]
> >How do you type ° efficiently with a standard 101 us keyboard?
>
> <irony>
> Simply buy an european keyboard, keyboards nowadays are cheap.
> </irony>
>
> Ciao
>
> P.S.: If you don't understand, look to the newsgroup archives, where I
please to
> not use Alt-126 (~) because it's not present in most european keyboards.
>
>

what about ¦ ? or @ or # ? or § or ¬ or ¢ .. wich ones are common?

i have

§°+¦"@*#ç°%§&¬/|(¢)=?'´`^~[]$}£{,;.:-_<>\

thats my set:D

(combinations with shift, and altgr, and with nothing else)

"Roberto Mariottini" <Roberto_member@pathlink.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:c12i6v$dl1$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> In article <c12eth$79s$1@digitaldaemon.com>, J Anderson says...
> >
> [...]
> >How do you type ° efficiently with a standard 101 us keyboard?
>
> <irony>
> Simply buy an european keyboard, keyboards nowadays are cheap.
> </irony>
>
> Ciao
>
> P.S.: If you don't understand, look to the newsgroup archives, where I
please to
> not use Alt-126 (~) because it's not present in most european keyboards.
>
>

Derek Parnell wrote:
> 
> I tend to agree with you on this Matthew. However the concept of a token that signifies a reference to the last element is still a useful idea. Off the top of my head, I suggest the Regular Expression symbol '$', such that a[$] refers to the last element. Thus things like a[4..$] and a[$-4..$-2], and a[$-var] would all be valid.

Why a token?  I'd prefer C++-style iterator semantics here, and possibly add properties begin, end, rbegin, and rend.  I was planning on doing something like this using standalone functions anyway.


Sean

Roberto Mariottini wrote:
> <irony>
> Simply buy an european keyboard, keyboards nowadays are cheap.
> </irony>

Yup, i find the european layout quite sane, except for Italian which doesn't hold to the more common european layout.

> P.S.: If you don't understand, look to the newsgroup archives, where I please to
> not use Alt-126 (~) because it's not present in most european keyboards.

MOST??? I had seen German, French, and Finnish have it. Even the Israeli and the Russian keyboards do, IIRC.

-eye

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 13:00:32 -0800 (02/20/04 08:00:32)
, Sean Kelly <sean@ffwd.cx> wrote:

> Derek Parnell wrote:
>>
>> I tend to agree with you on this Matthew. However the concept of a token that signifies a reference to the last element is still a useful idea. Off the top of my head, I suggest the Regular Expression symbol '$', such that a[$] refers to the last element. Thus things like a[4..$] and a[$-4..$-2], and a[$-var] would all be valid.
>
> Why a token?  I'd prefer C++-style iterator semantics here, and possibly add properties begin, end, rbegin, and rend.  I was planning on doing something like this using standalone functions anyway.
>

I didn't literally mean a one-character-non-alphabetic thing. Anything that looks like a 'special' syntax element would surfice, and that could be a keyword or an operator-like character. I'm not wedded to the '$' symbol or anything else in particular.

However, if the worth of expending the energy in putting this idea in to a compiler is justified, whatever token is decided on, it should be as short as possible and very easily recognised by a human reader. We are trying to make life easier for coders, yes?

-- 
Derek

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:08:20 +1100 (02/19/04 14:08:20)
, Matthew <matthew.hat@stlsoft.dot.org> wrote:

>> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:53:51 +1100 (02/19/04 09:53:51)
>> , Matthew <matthew.hat@stlsoft.dot.org> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > "Derek Parnell" <Derek.Parnell@No.Spam> wrote in message

[snip]
>>
>> So yes, the '$' token is semantically equivalent to '<ARRAY>.length' when
>> detected inside a slice expression; it is just a shorthand notation. But
>> that is the whole point - it is a useful shorthand notation.
>
> This specific case is covered by the implicit end, in syntax that was
> proposed a long time ago
>
>    xyzzy = v_Customer_Hash_Table[lPosition .. ]
>
> In the same way, an implicit start would also be available
>
>    xyzzy = v_Customer_Hash_Table[ .. 10]
>

Yes, I remember this, and it is a common suggestion in other languages too. My issue with this idea is that it encourages mistakes to be made. An omitted token is ambiguous - it could be a mistake or not a mistake, and both are syntactically valid. I'm suggesting a compromise between brevity and easy-of-use.

Someone famous (Einstein?) once said "Things should be as simple as possible, but not too simple."

-- 
Derek

davepermen wrote:

> if the object has a .length property, then opDollar
> just returns that value. and thats it.

As the standard .length property can be redefined this approach might be too simple.

So long.

What about a new keyword, 'last'?


"Derek Parnell" <Derek.Parnell@Psyc.ward> wrote in message news:opr3m4cktxdeu3pf@news.digitalmars.com...
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 13:00:32 -0800 (02/20/04 08:00:32)
> , Sean Kelly <sean@ffwd.cx> wrote:
>
> > Derek Parnell wrote:
> >>
> >> I tend to agree with you on this Matthew. However the concept of a token that signifies a reference to the last element is still a useful idea. Off the top of my head, I suggest the Regular Expression symbol '$', such that a[$] refers to the last element. Thus things like a[4..$] and a[$-4..$-2], and a[$-var] would all be valid.
> >
> > Why a token?  I'd prefer C++-style iterator semantics here, and possibly add properties begin, end, rbegin, and rend.  I was planning on doing something like this using standalone functions anyway.
> >
>
> I didn't literally mean a one-character-non-alphabetic thing. Anything that looks like a 'special' syntax element would surfice, and that could be a keyword or an operator-like character. I'm not wedded to the '$' symbol or anything else in particular.
>
> However, if the worth of expending the energy in putting this idea in to a compiler is justified, whatever token is decided on, it should be as short as possible and very easily recognised by a human reader. We are trying to make life easier for coders, yes?
>
> -- 
> Derek