[nem-en] incorrect side effect of ++ operator

[Kamil Skalski]

Dnia poniedziałek, 27 września 2004 17:39, Radek Jedrasiak napisał:
>
> > Just do
> > ++i;
> > Console.WriteLine( "{0}", i );
>
> How about a macro replacing the ++ prefix operator and ++ postfix operator
> with the coresponding blocks? That way the return types of assignments
> could be left to be void and there would still be less trouble with
> all the people who got used to the way i++ and ++i work (don't forget about
> -- ;-)

Well, it would be possible and maybe even not so hard with currently available 
traversal functions for parsetree. But it seems very hackish... and sometimes 
would need to do complex transoformations

foo (i, ++i)  ====>   ++i; foo (i, i);    ?

this would force us to do
def prev = i; ++i; foo (prev, i);

but

foo (i, ++i, ++i, ... ) would again complicate things

and foo (i, ref i, ++i) ....?

It's better to change the way programmers use it, than adding some strange 
background transformation.

Maybe there should be warning then somebody use void in parameter with more 
overloads than only object?

-- 
Kamil Skalski
http://nemerle.org developer