Pekka Klärck

No consensus on the syntax to use. Moving to RF 5.1 to give us more time to think about this. We have also been thinking about inline keyword call syntax...

One problem with using `=` or `:=` as a keyword like ``` ${var} = literal value ``` or ``` ${var} := literal value ``` is that it wouldn't work nicely...

Another thing to take into account is setting variables in different scopes. As #4177 demonstrates, current `Set Global/Suite/Test/Local Variable` keywords have some quirks that are hard to fix, and having...

There have been various proposals so far and I have some new ones in my mind as well. I try to summarize different options here: 1. New keyword to replace...

The main problem with current `Set Variable` is verbosity. I also don't like using keywords for common syntax now that we have IF/ELSE, TRY/EXCEPT, CONTINUE, BREAK and RETURN as well....

I agree that requiring ``` SET $name value ``` syntax can be confusing and being able to use ``` SET ${name} value ``` would be better. I still believe that...

I was able to reproduce the issue. The same problem occurs also if the expression is invalid.

Same problem occurs also with WHILE loops. The root cause is that we use the `DataError` exception for signaling problems in data and also consider such exceptions to denote syntax...

A related problem is that errors caused by invalid IF and WHILE conditions cannot be caught by TRY/EXCEPT.

Being able to run multiple keywords as a setup without defining a new one-off keyword or using `Run Keywords` would be nice, but we'd need to figure out some good...