Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #5218Re: From Modula to Oberon
From: Stanley T. Shebs
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 1988 19:59
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 1988 19:59
16 lines
1355 bytes
1355 bytes
In article <1008@pur-phy> hal@newton.physics.purdue.edu.UUCP (Hal Chambers) writes: >How would programmers feel if a language designer decided that a hierarchy >of implicit operator precedence was dangerous and required programmers >to always use parentheses explicitly! Gee, sounds like Lisp to me! I don't recall ever hearing that explicit parens everywhere reduced programmers' productivity; on the contrary, Lisp systems are considered one of the best tools to get lots of code written fast (reliability is another matter). Dunno why people assume that an operator precedence hierarchy is a Good Thing, given that its main rationale is historical (dating from the late Renaissance?), and that reduction of the size of source code is not a particularly strong reason! stan shebs shebs@cs.utah.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5316@utah-cs.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ut-sally!utah-cs!defun.utah.edu!shebsReferences:
<7161@sol.ARPA> <2787@enea.se> <1008@pur-phy>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ut-sally!utah-cs!defun.utah.edu!shebs From: shebs%defun.utah.edu.uucp@utah-cs.UUCP (Stanley T. Shebs) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: From Modula to Oberon Message-ID: <5316@utah-cs.UUCP> Date: 5 Mar 88 19:59:14 GMT References: <7161@sol.ARPA> <2787@enea.se> <1008@pur-phy> Sender: news@utah-cs.UUCP Reply-To: shebs%defun.utah.edu.UUCP@utah-cs.UUCP (Stanley T. Shebs) Organization: PASS Research Group Lines: 16 Keywords: Enumerations, subranges, arrays, FOR, Eiffel