Ralph Corderoy <ra...@inputplus.co.uk> wrote:
|I'm interested in better expressions, string and numeric. It's poor
|string expressions that got us into this via 'c'a'b'c'd'e'.
I'm wondering a bit since your current interim and part-time
favorite Python supports ask-me-the-name-for-it sequences:
elif o in ('-h', '--help'):
What about $,'a','b','c','d' or $,'a'b','c','d' instead.
See for mdocmx(7) i have to write
. ie 'Ar'\$1' .
. el .ie 'Cm'\$1' .
. el .ie 'Dv'\$1' .
. el .ie 'Er'\$1' .
...
. el \{\
. ds doc-mx-arx\n[doc-mx-ard]
. return
. \}
And this would be terrible and expensive even with || and &&:
.if $ 'Ar'\$1' || 'Cm'\$1' || 'Dv'\$1' || 'Er'\$1' || ...
But rather easy and cheap with a sequence:
.if $'\$1'Ar'Cm'Dv'Er'...$
.if $ ,'\$1', 'Ar', 'Cm', 'Dv', 'Er'...
Whatever... :(
I don't know, but i really think that the new syntax should be
general and apply to all places where expressions can be used.
I still think a single glance should make it clear that the
expression uses some new syntax, and a symbol character seems to
be more logical for that than anything else to me.
The good thing about this trigger is also that the syntax can be
extended iteratively, adding ||, && etc. over time.
--steffen
