Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| From: | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:15:33 -0700 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 10-02-024 10-02-039 10-02-086 10-02-088 10-03-003 10-03-005 10-03-007 10-03-012 |
| Keywords: | parse |
| Posted-Date: | 16 Apr 2010 01:50:09 EDT |
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:07:17 -0500, Robert A Duff
<bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
>glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes:
>
>> Both Fortran and PL/I have no reserved words. I am not so sure
>> about Fortran, but it seems to have been intentional for PL/I.
>> A large list of reserved words (reference COBOL) means that
>> programmers have to know those words, even if they don't need
>> those features.
>
>Not really. A programmer doesn't need to memorize all the reserved
>words. They can just write code, and fix it when the compiler
>complains "you tried to declare a procedure whose name is a reserved
>word".
That will depend on the language. Microsoft's Visual FoxPro has
reserved words. In practice, the tokeniser will not complain, and
there is only a problem if the reserved word has special meaning in
the context.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.