jcm@ORNL-MSR.ARPA (James A. Mullens) (11/02/85)
Someone Said: >> 5. There are various parts of the syntax that I don't like: >> 2. ;'s as statement terminators, I prefer the algol statement >> separator. > I disagree; I prefer ;'s as statement terminators. Trying to look at it > objectively, I can see very little reason to prefer one or the other. Firstly, this sounds a topic that could have been covered in infinite detail in earlier discussions. I would honestly appreciate some life forms or C wizards editing and organizing the archives topically, indexing the discussions under the appropriate K&R or standards document section, i.e. K&R 3.1 for discussions of ";". If this archival document could be stored in easily-printed form it might even be a C Corcerer's Classic, or at least a substantial tool which Corcerers can use to bludgeon Apprentices. (Those not comfortable with American, nota bene: Corcerer is not in an English dictionary, it is an abbreviation of C Sorcerer). Secondly, my comments. I don't see a major difference between "statement separator" and "statement terminator" if ";" is the only symbol allowed to perform the separation. However, I don't like the following use of ";" if (boolean_blah) true_action_blah ; else else_action_blah ; I prefer letting (certain) keywords act as statement separators in appropriate situations. Id est, if (boolean_blah) /* a Pascal-like syntax */ true_action_blah else /* here else is a separator */ else_action_blah; when an else-clause is used, and if (boolean_blah) /* a Pascal-like syntax */ true_action_blah; when an else-clause is not. Finally, it _seems_ redundant to require a ";" before a "}". Is it true that the only time ";" does not preceed "}" in an executable (non-declaration) statement is when "}" is preceeded by another "}"? The "}" keyword should be considered a separator a la ";" . Disclaimer: This is the opinion of a C novice who knows more about Pascal/FORTRAN/LISP/6502/6800/Z80/8088/PDP-11/68000, and likes Pascal to boot. -- Jim Mullens 615/574-5564 ARPA: jcm@ornl-msr
dave@inset.UUCP (Dave Lukes) (11/07/85)
In article <2742@brl-tgr.ARPA> jcm@ORNL-MSR.ARPA (James A. Mullens) writes: > >Someone Said: >>> 5. There are various parts of the syntax that I don't like: >>> 2. ;'s as statement terminators, I prefer the algol statement >>> separator. >> I disagree; I prefer ;'s as statement terminators. Trying to look at it >> objectively, I can see very little reason to prefer one or the other. > >I don't see a major difference between >"statement separator" and "statement terminator" if ";" is the only >symbol allowed to perform the separation. There is a major difference: people in general (not neccessarily particular individuals) make more mistakes with ``;'' separators than with ``;'' terminators (apparently this is why in ADA, ``;'' is a terminator, even though ADA is ``PASCAL-like'' in most things). Yours in separation and termination, Dave. -- All opinions, philosophies, dogmas and idiosyncrasies expressed in this article INCLUDING THIS DISCLAIMER, are solely those of the author.