> > 1) Perform the multiplication on the raw data of the string, that is
> > the ascii value - this is arguably what would happen in some cases in
> > C,
> > since a string is just an array of int8's.
> > 2) At compile time, realize that you can't multiply two strings and
> > throw a compile error.  This is the "pascal" way.
> > -or-
> > 3) realize that strings need to be converted to numbers first before
> > they can be multiplied, so do the conversion, complete the
> > multiplication and save the result as a number.
> >
> > I agree that #1 is the worst possible outcome.   You are arguing for
> > #2.  I would rather have #3.
> 
> #3 has the drawback of not catching unintentional conversions.  It is good
> to have a language where likely mistakes cause syntax errors instead of
> unwanted automatic conversions.  Remember that maintainence is the big
cost
> of software, not the initial writing.  Adding a few inline functions or
> whatever is trivial when first writing the code.  Chasing down runtime
bugs
> later when a change is made with a datatype a bit misunderstood is a lot
> more expensive.


I'll take #2 as well.  #3 leads you down the path where VB ended up, after
slowly drifting from #2 to #3.  Consider:

	X = 1 + "2"
	X = 1 & "2"

Without knowing what X is defined as, the result could be 3, "3", 12 or
"12".  Fun!

No thanks.

Actually, I could be wrong about the results, it's hard to remember exactly
what it does these days.  As I said, no thanks.

Tony


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist