frank@zen.co.uk (Frank Wales) (10/29/89)
In article <509@sagpd1.UUCP> jharkins@sagpd1.UUCP (Jim Harkins) writes: >In article <1989Oct23.161744.29153@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >>Nobody has ever quite gotten around to using `@' in C. > >I know, we'll use @ for nested comments! :-) I suggest using @ to mean "that special form of NULL which can be used legally where the real thing cannot". Dereferencing @ yields one of @, NULL or void, as appropriate. We can call it 'bottom', as in "disappearing up one's @." And to introduce some wanton ambiguity into the language, /@ (slash-bottom) can introduce a nestable comment, *@ (star-bottom) can introduce Tahnee Welch, and <@ (from-the-bottom) can cause a jump to the local FORTRAN compiler for the remainder of the program. -- Frank Wales, Systems Manager, [frank@zen.co.uk<->mcvax!zen.co.uk!frank] Zengrange Ltd., Greenfield Rd., Leeds, ENGLAND, LS9 8DB. (+44) 532 489048 x217
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (10/30/89)
In article <509@sagpd1.UUCP> jharkins@sagpd1.UUCP (Jim Harkins) writes: >>Nobody has ever quite gotten around to using `@' in C. > >I know, we'll use @ for nested comments! :-) No no no -- the nested-comment symbols are "(-:" and ":-)". In article <2003@zen.co.uk> frank@zen.co.uk (Frank Wales) writes: >... and <@ (from-the-bottom) can cause a jump to the local FORTRAN >compiler for the remainder of the program. And of course, >@ causes a similar jump to the local Ada compiler. -- A bit of tolerance is worth a | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology megabyte of flaming. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu