At 10:56 AM +0100 on 6/26/99, Kevin Miller wrote:
>>>put char 3 to -1 of line 7
>>
>>But that't not English. I think my idea is better.
>
>I'm not sure that I agree: your idea doesn't allow you to get the last
>three words, or word 2 to the second last, etc:
>
>put word -3 to -1 of tVar
>put word 2 to -2 of tVar
But for getting through the last word -- which in my experiance is very
common -- it is better.
However, we could have "put last [<expr>] word[s] of ..." and
"put word <expr> to <expr> from last of...".
>
>>Is there really any reason to force the user to jump through hurdles to
>>achieve the same effect? Why may we not intermix multiple types? It does
>>open some possibilities:
>>
>> put item 5 to (through?) end of line of container1 into container2
>>
>> put char 3 to end of word of container1 into container2
>>
>>I think I'll stop before I stop opening cans of worms and start opening
>>vats of worms.
>
>If you just want to go to the end of a container, you can use:
>
>put word 2 to word (the number of words in tVar) of tVar
Which makes less sence and is harder than:
put word 2 to last of...
But what do you think of the different start/stop delimiter idea?
