"Lars T. Kyllingstad" <pub...@kyllingen.nospamnet> wrote in message news:hbpcjk$2cl...@digitalmars.com... > AJ wrote: >> "KennyTM~" <kenn...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:hbpa89$27s...@digitalmars.com... >>> On Oct 22, 09 13:57, AJ wrote: >>>> "KennyTM~"<kenn...@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:hbopns$125...@digitalmars.com... >>>>> On Oct 22, 09 12:29, AJ wrote: >>>>>> "Adam D. Ruppe"<destructiona...@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:mailman.228.1256181155.20261.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 09:25:34PM -0500, AJ wrote: >>>>>>>> That's not D source code. Why do you keep trying to use English >>>>>>>> text as >>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>> example? >>>>>>> The logic behind all the arguments you make, >>>>>> That would be "all fine and dandy", but I'm not arguing about >>>>>> anything. >>>>>> (So >>>>>> you must be arguing? About what?). >>>>>> >>>>>>> except for one, should apply >>>>>>> equally well to English as it does to D. >>>>>> That's silly. There is no need to use the text of Shakespeare's >>>>>> tragedies >>>>>> to >>>>>> allude to source code. There is no need and it is entirely >>>>>> inappropriate >>>>>> to >>>>>> expand the context of the issue to other realms. The context is >>>>>> (currently): >>>>>> semicolons as statement terminators for single-statement lines. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Makes source code less comprehensible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Based on what? Because you say so? >>>>>> It's more to digest when it's not necessary. It's easier to identify >>>>>> something when it's in less intricate (read, plain) surroundings. >>>>>> >>>>>> <snipped inappropriate context reference> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. Is redundant with the newline designator. >>>>>>> >>>>>> <snipped inappropriate context reference> >>>>>> >>>>>>> is obviously false, >>>>>> If I put it on the list, it wasn't obvious at all, even if it is >>>>>> incorrect >>>>>> (though I think it is correct). >>>>>> >>>>>>> unless >>>>>>> you specifically require a line continuation character: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> a = b + >>>>>>> c >>>>>> Without semicolon requirement: >>>>>> >>>>>> a=b+ // this is an error >>>>>> c // this is OK >>>>>> >>>>>> With semicolon requirement: >>>>>> >>>>>> a=b+; // this is an error >>>>>> c; // this is OK >>>>>> >>>>>> What's the diff? >>>>>> >>>>>>> A newline and a semicolon are not redundant unless you specifically >>>>>>> define >>>>>>> a statement as being one and only one line. >>>>>> A semicolon is redundate with newline for single-statement lines. Oh, >>>>>> you >>>>>> say that a lot of constructs are inherently single statements but >>>>>> written >>>>>> on >>>>>> multiple lines? Well, that may be just the kind of examination I was >>>>>> looking >>>>>> for (ironic that _I_ had to bring it up, huh): >>>>>> >>>>>> if(true) >>>>>> dothis() >>>>>> >>>>>> That situation has to be evaluated: is parsing at the construct level >>>>>> too >>>>>> much effort or is it desireable? (ParseIfStatement()). >>>>>> Statement-level >>>>>> parsing better/worse than line-level parsing? >>>>>> >>>>>>> Back to the magic of above though. What if you rewrote it: >>>>>>> a = b >>>>>>> +c >>>>>> Without semicolon requirement: >>>>>> >>>>>> a=b // OK >>>>>> +c // error >>>>>> >>>>>> With semicolon requirement: >>>>>> >>>>>> a=b; // OK >>>>>> +c; // error >>>>>> >>>>>> What's the diff? >>>>> a=b >>>>> +c(d) // no error >>>> Why not? >>> Good question. Because the compiler accepts a=b;+c(d);. >> >> I don't think it should. >> >>> Whether c is declared as a variable or a function, it still looks >>>> wrong to me. A statement can't begin with a +. >>> OK. >>> >>> struct S { int a } >>> int a >>> >>> void main () { >>> S s >>> auto t = s >>> .a = 1 // ambiguity: Note that .sth means global scope. >>> } >> >> That's not ambiguous, it's erroneous. The passage means: >> >> auto t = s // fine >> .a = 1 // can't have .a without something on the left of the dot >> // or else remove the dot > > > In D you use the dot like that to access globals, cf. the comment in > KennyTM~s example. >
So much for attracting C++ users by not making D foreign to them.
