Hi Wolfgang,
On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 at 10:20, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:
Dear Simon,
In message CAPnjgZ1p6ueRhDsgBZGMXFhgv7UhRFA1UfvoHGGd0-136oTgvA@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
But how do we handle this?
var+=fred
Is this appending to var or assigning to var+ ?
It is assigning to "var+".
er...
var++=fred
is unambiguous but very confusing. I think it would be better to disallow +
It's neither unambiguous nor confusing. It is assigning to "var++".
What? Can you read that again?
I think we should not change what is old and might be in use.
It is much easier to change what is new and can be defined at will.
If we define for example that "<name>=+<value>" appends, then we can also define our own escape rules, for example:
var=fred assigns var=+fred appends "fred" var=\+fred assignes the value "+fred" var=++fred appends "+fred"
I don't like that at all. It requires an escape for a common case and is very confusing.
Since people will be converting their out-of-tree scripts anyway, they can check for this sort of madness at the time. There should be no problem.
Regards, Simon