Re: Are You Guys Serious?
David Cuny wrote:
> D'oh!
you just GOTTA love that word :)
> But you are correct, I was wrong - commas *do* have syntactic value.
actually, you were correct in the first place, and almost
wrong now. heh.
commas *currently* have syntactic value, but you were
right in saying that they aren't needed by the parser,
and as such, euphoria *doesn't* need them.
your example
s = {10 43 (38+30) (32 -1) }
is a valid and viable alternative.
might even be clearer, more elegant, and more efficient
to code with (potentially less typos) and even execute
(the parsers' overhead is reduced as it doesn't have
to parse all those commas, and can instead rely on
generic whitespace routines whilst simply looking for
the '}' to end/delimit sequences).
i'm assuming that (32 -1) would indeed be interpreted
as 31 since it's within the ()'s.
--l8tr Hawke'
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
