Lutger, el 16 de noviembre a las 23:27 me escribiste: > dsimcha wrote: > > > == Quote from Lutger (lutger.blijdest...@gmail.com)'s article > ... > >> int a = 1; > >> int b = --a, ++a; > >> assert(b == 1); > >> assert(a == 1); > > > > Axe. Looks like the only things it's good for are making code undreadable > > and abusing for loop syntax to... > > > > Make code unreadable. > > > > When the heck would this be significantly more readable, safer, or more > > concise > > than doing the equivalent without it? Also, from previous discussions I > > vaguely remember it's constraining other parts of the syntax. > > Those discussions were about nice native tuple syntax. The only argument in > favor of the comma operator I can remember is code-generation.
Which is a very dumb one. -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Y cuando llegamos a nuestro hogar ella saca de su bolsillo derecho un casete de Ricardo Montaner y nos dice: "Ponelo! Ponelo!"; nos desilusionamos un poco, pero a esa altura... Todo da igual. -- Sidharta Kiwi