Re: language twiddling, was Infinite look ahead required by C++?

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:22:14 -0400, Robert A Duff
<bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:


[snip]


>Wow! I've never used Visual FoxPro, but I found this via google:
>
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/xztfc506(VS.80).aspx
>
>which says:
>
> "...When programming, avoid using reserved words as names for window,
> table, or field names. If you use a reserved word as a name, it
> might generate a syntax error."
>
>"might"?! That's amazingly poor language design, unless there's some
>documentation elsewhere that defines when they really are reserved.


          Not that I am aware of. It does seem to be that the reserved
meaning takes precedence in that particular context, but otherwise,
the word can be used as a variable, etc. name.


          I got bit on this once when I called a column "status". One time
in debugging, I typed
                    display status
which would have displayed the status column if status were not a
reseved word. I got something else.


>To me, "reserved" ought to mean "you will get a compile time error if
>you use these words in certain contexts".
>
>It then goes on to list approximately 2500 "reserved words". So
>programmers are expected to memorize thousands of words, and avoid
>their use with little help from the compiler. That's just nuts!


          Just? What about silly?


Sincerely,


Gene Wirchenko

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