Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| detecting ambiguous grammars thant@acm.org (Thant Tessman) (2001-02-15) |
| Re: detecting ambiguous grammars thant@acm.org (Thant Tessman) (2001-03-26) |
| Re: detecting ambiguous grammars cfc@world.std.com (Chris F Clark) (2001-03-27) |
| Re: detecting ambiguous grammars kenarose@earthlink.net (Ken Rose) (2001-03-31) |
| C declaration syntax (was Re: detecting ambiguous grammars) henry@spsystems.net (2001-04-04) |
| From: | henry@spsystems.net (Henry Spencer) |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 4 Apr 2001 00:26:58 -0400 |
| Organization: | SP Systems, Toronto, Canada |
| References: | 01-02-080 01-03-119 01-03-139 01-03-183 |
| Keywords: | parse, C, history |
| Posted-Date: | 04 Apr 2001 00:26:57 EDT |
Our moderator wrote:
>[...The idea of C declaration syntax is that the
>declaration of something looks like the way that you use it. I agree
>that it's debatable how good an idea that turned out to be. -John]
Dennis Ritchie has commented that in retrospect, the declaration syntax
would have worked *much* better if the indirection operator had been
postfix rather than prefix. The declare-it-like-you-use-it syntax is not
the real villain here; the big problem is the confusing mixture of prefix
and postfix operators.
--
When failure is not an option, success | Henry Spencer henry@spsystems.net
can get expensive. -- Peter Stibrany | (aka henry@zoo.toronto.edu)
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.