Related articles |
---|
[2 earlier articles] |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C sethml@ugcs.caltech.edu (1997-03-13) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C rrogers@cs.washington.edu (1997-03-13) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C creedy@mitretek.org (1997-03-14) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (1997-03-16) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C andy@cs.Stanford.EDU (1997-03-16) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C malcolm@sedi8.nag.co.uk (1997-03-16) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C apardon@rc4.vub.ac.be (1997-03-18) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C jenglish@crl.com (1997-03-18) |
Re: Definable operators (was: Problems with Hardware, Languages, and C nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (1997-03-21) |
From: | apardon@rc4.vub.ac.be (Antoon Pardon) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers,comp.lang.misc |
Date: | 18 Mar 1997 12:49:12 -0500 |
Organization: | Brussels Free Universities (VUB/ULB), Belgium |
References: | 97-03-037 97-03-051 97-03-084 |
Keywords: | design |
> with a restricted set of operators, your're forced to chose
> something at least a little better than "frop."
Malcolm Cohen (malcolm@sedi8.nag.co.uk) wrote:
: Well sure, if you cannot invent new operators but only overload the
: existing ones, it is not longer any harder to parse than before
: (though understanding the semantics may have suffered).
: But if you can invent new operator names
: (a) the language cannot force you to make those sensible
This is true, but then the language can't force you to choose
sensible variable/procedure/function names either. So what is so
terrible about this?
--
Antoon Pardon Brussels Free University Computing Centre
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.