Guinevere Larsen <guinevere@redhat.com> writes:

> Thanks for the review, I have made all the other changes you suggested!
>
> On 1/23/26 4:11 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>> +This means you can use it to prototype a solution without
>>> +needing to recompile the inferior.  Try it by setting 'vec'
>>> +to a sorted array, like by using:
>>> +    print vec = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5}
>>> +and see how the program would end, with the "continue"
>>> +command again.
>> Isn't it strange to teach newbies that to assign a value to a
>> variable, one must use the 'print' command?  Why not "set variable"?
>
> It is a bit strange, I suppose, but "set" (like "call") are not things I use
> personally, when print can do the same and is one fewer command to remember
>
> And this doubles as a warning that if the user calls a function that has
> side-effects, those will also happen, and they aren't necessarily always
> desired by the user...
>
> I can change it if you feel strongly that we should use "set" instead, but I
> find the side-effect explanation to be worth the unintuitiveness

FWIW, I use both set and call to avoid printing the result values as
appropriate (less screen real-estate, and fewer $n variables are my
reasons).  I think the text is fine as-is, but would personally mention
it.

I do think mentioning that 'print' computes an arbitrary expression
including side effects is quite important, and if I was to mention call
and set, I'd define them in terms of print for that reason (as the
manual does).
-- 
Arsen Arsenović