search for: proopsal

...front. * So my current idea is very similar to Dave's, except that I replace string with tokens (i.e., having both iterators as tokens and paste "operator" results as tokens). What do you think? Which one is more readable to you? !case<> or #"# or ... ? [Can the for-loop proopsal be a preprocessing phase?] I guess the example Dave gave (see below) cannot be handled in a (even extended) preprocessor. I am not keen on implementing for-loop in a preprocessor. I chose a preprocessor because I think it would cause least impact to the codebase and, to be honest, I didn't add...

...rconcat(string, ""). This keeps consistency and provides more flexibility to the # operator. > What do you think? Which one is more readable to you? !case<> or #"# or ... ? I like an infix #. It's consistent with at least some other languages. > [Can the for-loop proopsal be a preprocessing phase?] > > I guess the example Dave gave (see below) cannot be handled in a (even > extended) preprocessor. I am not keen on implementing for-loop in a > preprocessor. I chose a preprocessor because I think it would cause > least impact to the codebase and, to be...

On Oct 6, 2011, at 12:42 PM, David A. Greene wrote: > Jakob Stoklund Olesen <jolesen at apple.com> writes: > >> On Oct 6, 2011, at 7:59 AM, David A. Greene wrote: >> >>> For example, I want to be able to do this: >>> >>> defm MOVH : >>> vs1x_fps_binary_vv_node_rmonly< >>> 0x16, "movh", undef, 0, >>>

...his keeps consistency and provides more > flexibility to the # operator. > >> What do you think? Which one is more readable to you? !case<> or #"# or ... ? > > I like an infix #. It's consistent with at least some other languages. > >> [Can the for-loop proopsal be a preprocessing phase?] >> >> I guess the example Dave gave (see below) cannot be handled in a (even >> extended) preprocessor. I am not keen on implementing for-loop in a >> preprocessor. I chose a preprocessor because I think it would cause >> least impact to the...

... This keeps consistency and provides more > flexibility to the # operator. > >> What do you think? Which one is more readable to you? !case<> or #"# or ... ? > > I like an infix #.  It's consistent with at least some other languages. > >> [Can the for-loop proopsal be a preprocessing phase?] >> >> I guess the example Dave gave (see below) cannot be handled in a (even >> extended) preprocessor. I am not keen on implementing for-loop in a >> preprocessor. I chose a preprocessor because I think it would cause >> least impact to the...