|"WITH Considered Dangerous" by Wirth? Paul_Long@ortel.org (1994-06-25)|
|re: "WITH Considered Dangerous" by Wirth? firstname.lastname@example.org (1994-06-26)|
|Re: "WITH Considered Dangerous" by Wirth? email@example.com (1994-06-26)|
|From:||Paul_Long@ortel.org (Paul Long)|
|Keywords:||Pascal, modula, design, question|
|Date:||Sat, 25 Jun 1994 17:50:14 GMT|
Several years ago, I developed a proprietary language based on Modula-2.
A colleague who had developed a commercial Modula-2 compiler told me that
although Pascal and Modula-2 had a WITH statement, WIrth decided at some
point that it was a bad idea and dropped it from his subsequent languages.
Because of this and because of my own reservations about WITH, I did not
include it in the language I was developing. (There's a good chance you
use programs written in it every day. It's used by telephone companies to
implement call-processing applications.)
Did Wirth really decide that the disadvantages of WITH, e.g., creation of
homonyms, outweigh its advantages, e.g. shorthand and inherent
common-subexpression elimination? What Wirth languages do not have a WITH
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.