Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!jcm@ORNL-MSR.ARPA From: jcm@ORNL-MSR.ARPA (James A. Mullens) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: C Wishes Message-ID: <2742@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Sat, 2-Nov-85 15:55:02 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.2742 Posted: Sat Nov 2 15:55:02 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 4-Nov-85 01:44:46 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Lines: 58 Someone Said: >> 5. There are various parts of the syntax that I don't like: >> 2. ;'s as statement terminators, I prefer the algol statement >> separator. > I disagree; I prefer ;'s as statement terminators. Trying to look at it > objectively, I can see very little reason to prefer one or the other. Firstly, this sounds a topic that could have been covered in infinite detail in earlier discussions. I would honestly appreciate some life forms or C wizards editing and organizing the archives topically, indexing the discussions under the appropriate K&R or standards document section, i.e. K&R 3.1 for discussions of ";". If this archival document could be stored in easily-printed form it might even be a C Corcerer's Classic, or at least a substantial tool which Corcerers can use to bludgeon Apprentices. (Those not comfortable with American, nota bene: Corcerer is not in an English dictionary, it is an abbreviation of C Sorcerer). Secondly, my comments. I don't see a major difference between "statement separator" and "statement terminator" if ";" is the only symbol allowed to perform the separation. However, I don't like the following use of ";" if (boolean_blah) true_action_blah ; else else_action_blah ; I prefer letting (certain) keywords act as statement separators in appropriate situations. Id est, if (boolean_blah) /* a Pascal-like syntax */ true_action_blah else /* here else is a separator */ else_action_blah; when an else-clause is used, and if (boolean_blah) /* a Pascal-like syntax */ true_action_blah; when an else-clause is not. Finally, it _seems_ redundant to require a ";" before a "}". Is it true that the only time ";" does not preceed "}" in an executable (non-declaration) statement is when "}" is preceeded by another "}"? The "}" keyword should be considered a separator a la ";" . Disclaimer: This is the opinion of a C novice who knows more about Pascal/FORTRAN/LISP/6502/6800/Z80/8088/PDP-11/68000, and likes Pascal to boot. -- Jim Mullens 615/574-5564 ARPA: jcm@ornl-msr