tobold.org

correct • elegant • free

△ comp.lang.misc △

◅ Lisp syntax

Derivation of PL/I ▻

Derivation of PL/I

In article <881ftf$re5$1@relay1.dsccc.com>,
Mike McCarty <jmccarty@sun1307.ssd.usa.alcatel.com> wrote:
>The paradigm seems to be
>
>   a o= b;         a = aob;
>
>where o is a binary operator. But try this with the binary operators >
>and <

I think if you replace "binary" with "arithmetic", you'll find that the
rule is consistent.  It doesn't extend to logical operators.

Although C conflates the Boolean and integer types, careful programmers
keep them separate.

>   a >= b;         a = a>b;

Or maybe you were joking?  I can't believe the right hand expression
occurs more often in real code than logical xor (which would, err,
logically use the non-existent token `^^'). In any case, `>=' has a
rather older meaning than this.

C has plenty of flaws, but I don't think this is one of them.

Tim.
--
Tim Goodwin   | "If you don't know what closures are, you probably don't
Leicester, UK | want to know what closures are." -- Larry Wall

Original headers:

From: tjg@star.le.ac.uk (Tim Goodwin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.programming,comp.lang.misc,
  comp.arch.embedded,comp.realtime,comp.lang.pl1
Subject: Re: Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)
Date: 14 Feb 2000 11:26:18 -0000
Message-ID: <888opg$uem$1@ltpcg.star.le.ac.uk>
References: <%NNf4.14333$oJ5.28732@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>
  <87slas$ce2$1@relay1.dsccc.com> <38a439b6@pull.gecm.com>
  <881ftf$re5$1@relay1.dsccc.com>

△ comp.lang.misc △

◅ Lisp syntax

Derivation of PL/I ▻