From: dblack@...
Date: 2003-01-11T07:11:15+09:00
Subject: Re: dot-equals method?

Hi --

On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Daniel Carrera wrote:

> > > However, there is no `split!' method, nor could there ever be, since `split'
> > > is a string method returning an array.  That's what I like so much about the
> > > `.=' idea.
> >
> > It doesn't make visual or semantic sense to me;
> [snip]
> > Well, yeah, changing the object itself is the point of the bang
> > methods :-)  I don't think the thing you're talking about has a bearing
> > on that; it seems to be more a kind of assignment shorthand.
>
> I don't see how it's much worse than *=, +=, etc.
> These don't change the method (like !) but are assignment shorthands.

The . has a somewhat different status than + or *, though.

    x += 1       ==     x = x.+ 1
    x *= 1       ==     x = x.* 1

    x .= split   ?=     x = x.. split

so (the way I perceive it) there's an extra level of collapsing syntax
into shortcut in the .= case.  (Mind you, exact correspondence to +=
and *= isn't necessarily a deciding factor.)


David

-- 
David Alan Black
home: dblack@candle.superlink.net
work: blackdav@shu.edu
Web:  http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav