Re: XFoot with Qualified DS's

[Hans Boldt <boldt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

M. Lazarus wrote:

> At 11/25/03 08:57 AM, you wrote:
>
> > += is a good thing to remember.  Much like the optional factor 1 in 
> > the ADD op code.
>
>
>  Does anyone think that the shorthand syntax is a little backwards?
> It replaces this format: X = X + 1 with X += 1.  Shouldn't it be X =+ 
> 1?  It's a little easier to visualize putting the X in between the = and 
> + than having to reverse it.
>
>
>  I realize that C and it's derivatives do it that way, I just think that 
> it's a little odd.  JMHO.
>
>  Hans, would it be possible to have the compiler handle both ways?
>
>  -mark

Interesting question. Apparently, the first version of C actually 
implemented it as "x=+1;". It was quickly changed to "x+=1;" when it was 
realized that the former had a another and more common interpretation.

(If it's still not obvious what the issue is, think of the difference 
between "x=-1;" and "x-=1;", and consider that the former was allowed in 
the RPG IV language long before the latter was.)

Cheers! Hans