On 2013-08-04 22:41, Andreas Schwab wrote: > x+=a is the same as x=x+a. In most cases I'd agree, in this case I think it changes the logic when considering += as an atomic increment (which, of course, += isn't, but aesthetically it presents itself as such) as opposed to two separate operations.
> Now replace a by (x=1) and it becomes obvious that 1 is a perfectly valid > outcome. Yes, I agree, it becomes ambiguous when described in this fashion. I think the aesthetics of x+=y vs x=x+y are important here.
pgpXy5Evaq9YQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
