🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <...>, tim@franck.Princeton.EDU (Tim Hollebeek) wrote:

> In article <...>, Matt Austern <matt@physics.berkeley.edu> wrote:
...
> >Alternative tokens, in other words, solve the same problem that
> >trigraphs do.  Personally, though, I think that alternative 
> >tokens are a much nicer solution.  I'd much rather read an 
> >expression like "i < 0 or i >= n" than one like "i < 0 ??!??! i >= n".
> 
...
> Now back to the issue at hand.  Having lots of keywords makes this
> problem even worse, unless you have an editor that can highlight them
> automatically for you.  The are simply too hard to pick out by eye.
> && is much easier to see and recognize than 'and' is.

That's not the point. '&&' may be easier to pick out than 'and', and
'||' may easier to pick out than 'or' (although on a system with syntax
coloring, I would disagree with this), but if I am programming on a system
in which I _cannot_ _have_ '||', I would absolutely prefer 'or' over
'??!??!'. Trigraphs are simply abominable to read, IMHO.

Besides, having these keywords available to you does not force you
to use them. There's nothing wrong with establishing coding standards
which use an appropriate subset of the language. It's only when that
subset is chosen through fear and ignorance that you run into problems.

-- 
Scott Howlett, howlett@netcom.com
"Probably the earliest fly swatters were nothing more than some sort of 
striking surface attached to the end of a long stick."


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]