4 Jan 2006 - [Googie] - Here's some very simple way to use [set] command like the following:
 set a 5
 set b $a + 3 + ($a * 2)
 puts $b

'$b' will be 18. The only requirement is to use 'mathematical' [set] case with more than 1 and 2 arguments (which are number of arguments for default [set] syntax). In practise it means that you have to do at least one white-space in math expression, or [set] will be interpreted as the Tcl-built-in one. Here's code to enable such functionality:

 rename ::set ::set.org
 proc ::set {var args} {
     if {[llength $args] > 1} {
         uplevel [list ::set.org $var [eval expr "{$args}"]]
     } else {
         uplevel [list ::set.org $var [lindex $args 0]]
     }
 }

----
[RS]: Cute. But the case of [[llength $args]]==0 should also be covered as returning the value - right now it would set it to {}. Also, all the efficiency gained with braced expressions is of course lost here...

----
[WHD]: I prefer "let", as in

 let b {$a + 3 + ($a * 2)}

or especially

 let x {$x + 1.5}

Implemented in [C], it's also reasonably fast.

''[escargo] 10 Jan 2006'' - I kind of like that distinction (that is, between ''set'' and ''let'').
(Maybe because I was exposed to some form of BASIC in ancient times.)  It certainly is less typing
to write

 let x {$x + 1.5}

than

 set x [expr {$x + 1.5}]

What about allowing bare words to dispense with the $?  (Since the braced expression is
a right hand side, after all.) That would give

 let x {x + 1.5}

Is that too radical a change?
[RS]: It might cause conflicts between functions and arrays:
 let x {sin(x)+cos(y)}


----
[Category Command]