Robert Fraser wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
Oliver Hoog wrote:
Robert Fraser schrieb:
Chad J wrote:
This makes things more difficult for syntax highlighters. A number of
them will just not work correctly because they don't actually parse
the
code.
That's all I've got.
Ehhh.... How often will you actually use the identifiers? The point
isn't to make them free for use, it's more to reduce the number of
people bitching about how many keywords there are.
I guess they would still keep complaining since the number of
available keywords to be remembered doesn't decrease.
There are a million words in the English language, so it's not likely
that we'll run short of identifier space in the conceivable future :-)
The real problem is remembering the keywords.
Eh? I disagree -- think about how many uses of "static" there are, or
the wars about "enum". Overloading keywords is MUCH more confusing than
reserving another word.
Confession:
I've never, ever been confused by the use of "static". Not even once,
and not even when I was a complete beginner. I have always taken in the
numerous jokes related to "static" with the politely faked, resigned
smile of someone who knows will never really "get" it. And deep in my
heart of hearts, whenever a "static" joke comes about, the belief that
I'm an outcast sinks in a bit deeper.
Guess it's time for me to join the Static-Impaired Anonymous...
Andrei
