I think I understand what Tom means, however there
is a subtle 'flaw' in his argument, in that the
separation between := and <- assignment is fully
identified by the inclusion inside or outside of a
function.
:= is used 'outside' in the worksheet at large,
while
<- is used 'inside' functions.
It would be my contention that that distinction
(inside/outside of function) is generally
sufficient.
The special case is that for the 'box' style
function which has := inside, then we still are
able to have a result = value displayed, and that
should be the first raw pass through that
calculation. It is not normal to have a result =
inside a function !
On 12/1/2009 1:44:47 PM, Mona Zeftel wrote:
>Tom,
>
>We are looking at this right
>now. We are keeping the
>vertical bars and =sticking
>closely to the current Mathcad
>implementation, but want to
>=improve what we can.
>
>Tom can you explain your
>objections to using := within
>programs. I =don't understand
>what you mean that ← is a
>numeric operator and has =a
>value.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mona
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: poweruser Listmanager
>[mailto:listmanager@collab.mat
>hsoft.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 01,
>2009 2:34 AM
>Subject: Programming Question
>for Mathcad Prime
>
>From: "Tom Gutman"
>
>Ah, using C syntax rather than
>an extension of the standard
>mathematical =piecewise
>function definition. I expect
>that the developers like it,
>=because they are C
>programmers, not Mathcad
>users.
>
>I don't much care for it. My
>experience with C is that
>keeping the =indentation and
>nesting levels straight is a
>PITA. If you make the
>=indentations large, programs
>quickly run off the right edge
>of the =sheet. If you make it
>small, it becomes difficult to
>visually see =corresponding
>indents in widelyu separated
>sections. I find that the
>=program bar works very well,
>giving a clear, easy to see
>indication of =the nesting
>while using relatively little
>screen space.
>
>I also use program structures
>as values within an expression
>(rarely at =the worksheet
>level, usually within a
>program) and would not want to
>=give that up.
>
>While there's a lot to be said
>for eliminating the dual
>assignments =(:=, ←) this
>requires great care. The two
>are not anywhere near
>=equivalent, having, for
>starters, very different
>syntax. := is a =statement
>definition, can exist only as
>a top level operator, and has
>no =value; ← is a numeric
>operator that can be used
>anywhere an =expression can be
>used and has a defined value.
>__________________
>� � � � Tom Gutman
>
>
>To reply:
>mailto:poweruser.131107@collab
>.mathsoft.com
>To start a new topic:
>mailto:poweruser@collab.mathso
>ft.com
>To login:
>http://collab.mathsoft.com:80/
>~listserv/
Philip Oakley C.Eng
philipoakley@iee.org