After we implement #119, there would be little reason not to have postfix:<++> and postfix:<-->.
Not only that, our ability to construct these as macros would be a good showcase for macros and storage locations/lvalues. Because we'd expect something like
to work, and that kind of presupposes that we think in terms of storage locations instead of (as is the case in many places in the code right now) in terms of identifiers.
After we implement #119, there would be little reason not to have
postfix:<++>andpostfix:<-->.Not only that, our ability to construct these as macros would be a good showcase for macros and storage locations/lvalues. Because we'd expect something like
to work, and that kind of presupposes that we think in terms of storage locations instead of (as is the case in many places in the code right now) in terms of identifiers.