Re: Definable operators

rivetchuck@aol.com
2 Apr 1997 16:01:20 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[3 earlier articles]
Re: Definable operators henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (1997-03-22)
Re: Definable operators nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (1997-03-23)
Re: Definable operators fanf@lspace.org (Tony Finch) (1997-03-23)
Re: Definable operators Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1997-03-27)
Re: Definable operators henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (1997-03-31)
Re: Definable operators sethml@ugcs.caltech.edu (1997-03-31)
Re: Definable operators rivetchuck@aol.com (1997-04-02)
Re: Definable operators Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1997-04-02)
Re: Definable operators burley@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) (1997-04-03)
Re: Definable operators rideau@ens.fr (Francois-Rene Rideau) (1997-04-03)
Re: Definable operators leichter@smarts.com (Jerry Leichter) (1997-04-06)
Re: Definable operators hrubin@stat.purdue.edu (1997-04-11)
Re: Definable operators nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (1997-04-16)
[27 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |

From: rivetchuck@aol.com
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 2 Apr 1997 16:01:20 -0500
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
References: 97-03-179
Keywords: syntax, design
Received-Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 19:42:46 -0500

This is an interesting thread, especially from the perspective of
someone who is academically trained in compiler construction and
hardware, but programs as a hobby. I think that we often look at
things from an academic rather than usability standpoint, and fall
into the "forest/trees" paradigm. What does a string + int mean? To
many folks, it would represent converting the int to a string followed
by concatenation. I found the same logic while working with
programmers at a large defense contractor. When presented with the
academically "obvious" features of Ada, the professional programmers
often scratched their heads, asking "how did they come up with THIS
syntax?"


Perspective is important. Reading code, like reading a book, is
subject to interpretation based upon your frame of reference.
Unfortunately, code should NOT be open to interpretation. I argue for
common sense implementations/syntax over what is academically correct.


My 2 cents worth.


Chuck Riechers
RivetChuck@aol.com
--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.