On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Sebastien Vauban <
wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> wrote:

> Hi Rainer,
>
> Rainer M Krug wrote:
> >> > * appending to a file-wide property
> >> >   :PROPERTIES:
> >> >   :var+:      , baz=3
> >> >   :END:
> >>
> >> To be honest, the only thing that I dislike is the comma in the above
> line.
> >> Not intuitive at all. Quite hard to read.
> >>
> >> Can't the comma be implicitly added by the `+' after the property name?
> >
> > On the one hand, it might have one additional advantage:
> >
> >   #+property: var   foo="This is a very long text"
> >   #+property: var+ "with even more."
>
> I don't think such a construction would be tolerated. I guess you must
> write
> a var name (foo, bar, baz, ...) after the `var+' keyword.
>
> > Would foo be:
> > "This is a very long text with even more"
>
> To be accurate, it would have become:
>
>  "This is a very long textwith even more"
>
> if such a concatenation would be implied.
>

Correct - missing space.


>
> > Could one make the "," implicit, if the value follows the
> >
> > x=y
> >
> > style, while otherwise just concatenate the value to the one before?
>
> I guess this is going too far, as Babel is untyped: what about...
>
>    #+property: var   foo=2
>    #+property: var+  5
>
> Does foo become equal to 25?
>
> (I know I exaggerate somehow, but just to show I guess such extensions are
> simply not possible without explicit types).
>
>
You definitely have a point here - so I opt for the implicit ","


Cheers,

Rainer

But, if not equal to 25, what would be expected?  An error, ...?
>
> Best regards,
>  Seb
>
> --
> Sebastien Vauban
>
>
>


-- 
Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology,
UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany)

Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology
Stellenbosch University
South Africa

Tel :       +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44
Cell:       +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98
Fax (F):       +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44

Fax (D):    +49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44

email:      Rainer@krugs.de

Skype:      RMkrug