From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from techfac.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([129.70.132.100]) by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2062>; Thu, 16 Sep 1993 06:11:26 -0400
Received: from dahlie.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
	by techfac.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE id AA15850; Thu, 16 Sep 1993 12:11:04 +0200
Received: by dahlie.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de (5.0/tp.29.0890)
	id AA08368; Thu, 16 Sep 93 12:11:02 +0200
Date:	Thu, 16 Sep 1993 06:11:02 -0400
From:	malte@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Message-Id: <9309161011.AA08368@dahlie.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
To:	rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu
Subject: Re:  list operators

Thanks to all of you for your quick answers! But let my summarize and
the take the discussion a little further:

    1) It is too late to introduce changes

It's not really a change since it doesn't change the semantics of existing,
valid scripts.

    2) The syntax is bad

Yes !! Maybe its an alt.tasteless candidate.

    3) A semantic improvement

I should have thought of that! Of course,
    ; x = ( 1 2 3 4 ) echo $x( -1 -3 )
    2 4
is much better.

    4) Why not use a function

Thanks to all who disclosed their solutions, but I already had some. I think,
there's more then one point of view to it:
Experienced rc users certainly don't have problems to write a function doing
the work, to put it in some kind of library and to reuse it on other occasions.
But the notion of "omit it if you can write a function" doesn't help novices
and - be honest to yourself - isn't it boring that you always have to source
some other file to include a function in your script ( . /some/file || exit )?
So it's speed and beauty vs usability. I'm still convinced my suggestions
enhance both.

Malte