[chuck-users] assignment (BUG?)

Robert Poor rdpoor at gmail.com
Sun May 31 19:19:04 EDT 2009

FWIW, I did stumble over an example where => and @=> differ.  I typed

	noisemakers[x] => Noisemaker @ current_noisemaker;

which tried to patch noisemakers[x] into a null unit generator,  
producing some strange runtime error.  Of course what I intended was:

	noisemakers[x] @=> Noisemaker @ current_noisemaker;

So sometimes you just have to ask "please" to get ChucK to do the  
right thing.

- Rob

On 31 May 2009, at 15:37, Tom Lieber wrote:

> I don't think there are any satisfying reasons for the current
> behavior. File native type references (int @ x) as a feature request
> if it's not already. :)
> I think @=> is an unnecessary operator. I like the description from
> way back that the "@" means "please."
> -- 
> Tom Lieber
> http://AllTom.com/
> _______________________________________________
> chuck-users mailing list
> chuck-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
> https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users

More information about the chuck-users mailing list