Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #5445Re: FOR loops
From: Sean Hayes
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1988 09:46
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1988 09:46
20 lines
1294 bytes
1294 bytes
In article <YWK3hUy00VA88IO0UA@andrew.cmu.edu> jk3k+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joe Keane) writes: >While i'm at childish flaming, i might as well say that i _really_ hate `fi', >`rof', `esac', and `elihw'. Can anyone say they're a good idea and keep a >straight face? Me too. "They're a good idea." :-| Ok, maybe they're not that good, but at least they are obvious. I liked the Algol 68 notion of allowing parentheses as an alternative when it made things clearer. The closing of blocks of code with a delimiter is a must. The only viable alternative is Landins "offside rule", which forces the correct indentation. I don't know if this has been tried in an imperative language. Sean, _________________________________________________________________________ |Sean Hayes, Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Bristol, England| |net: esh@hplb.uucp esh%shayes@hplabs.HP.COM ..!mcvax!ukc!hplb!esh|
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2400014@otter.hple.hp.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!hplabs!otter!eshReferences:
<2853@enea.se>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!hplabs!otter!esh From: esh@otter.hple.hp.com (Sean Hayes) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: FOR loops Message-ID: <2400014@otter.hple.hp.com> Date: 14 Apr 88 09:46:59 GMT References: <2853@enea.se> Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK. Lines: 19