Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #731Re: PL/I Grammar
From: Richard H. Gumpertz
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1989 06:49
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1989 06:49
16 lines
1489 bytes
1489 bytes
In article <1962@bacchus.dec.com> bothner@decwrl.dec.com (Per Bothner) writes: >In article <422@cpsolv.UUCP> rhg@cpsolv.uucp (Richard H. Gumpertz) writes: >> (increment >= 0 ? *index <= limit : *index >= limit) & (BEGIN == END); >> No, the & in the second line shouldn't be an &&. > >Could you please explain how && and & could be different in this case? I was trying to be as precise as possible. They differ if the evaluation of BEGIN or END generates side-effects: the WHILE(...) clause in PL/I is evaluated even if the loop is ready to terminate. A minor point; I probably shouldn't have even pointed it out. -- ========================================================================== | Richard H. Gumpertz rhg@cpsolv.UUCP -or- ...!uunet!amgraf!cpsolv!rhg | | Computer Problem Solving, 8905 Mohawk Lane, Leawood, Kansas 66206-1749 | ==========================================================================
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<427@cpsolv.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ginosko!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!texbell!vector!attctc!kcdev!cpsolv!rhgReferences:
<2956@usceast.UUCP> <422@cpsolv.UUCP> <1962@bacchus.dec.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ginosko!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!texbell!vector!attctc!kcdev!cpsolv!rhg From: rhg@cpsolv.UUCP (Richard H. Gumpertz) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: PL/I Grammar Keywords: PL/I, C, grammar, parser Message-ID: <427@cpsolv.UUCP> Date: 23 Oct 89 06:49:19 GMT References: <2956@usceast.UUCP> <422@cpsolv.UUCP> <1962@bacchus.dec.com> Reply-To: rhg@cpsolv.uucp (Root) Organization: Computer Problem Solving, Leawood, Kansas Lines: 16