Re: Is this the Free-Format that we asked for?

Well, to be honest, the statement actually read

a=b=c=d=0=e

To this day I don't know if that was a typo on the programmers part, or 
something
the compiler could actually figure out.  I think that is why I hate it, the 
first
time I ever saw it, it was abused.  (To me this would be saying that A, B, C 
and D
are equal to the boolean expression 0 = e but I just don't know).

It's not a=(b=c) that's the problem, but consider this...

a=b=c

Is B changed by that statement?  That could be interpreted, b = c and a = b or 
it
could be interpreted a = the boolean expressions b = c.
Depending on what language and what compiler you are using, it could be either!
Pascal doesn't have that problem.

a := b = c;

Nor does C

a = b == c;  (Boolean)
a = b = c;   (b is assigned the value of c)

Basic has the problem.

Regards,

Jim Langston

Scott Klement wrote:
> 
> I really don't see why you find these hard to follow.   Yes, for someone
> still in school learning this stuff, its a bit confusing.  But after
> working with it for a few days, its second nature.
> 
> I've wanted MANY TIMES to be able to do something like a=b=c=0.
> 
> Something like A = (B = C) is basically just a COMP op-code, except that
> you can give a more meaningful name to the result than "57".
> 
> Personally, I like languages (like C) that use a different operator for
> comparisons vs. assignments.  If you know that = is an assignment, and ==
> is a comparison, your examples are pretty easy.
> 
> must be assigning 0 to everything, since = is only assignment:
> a = b = c = 0
> 
> must be assigning a boolean value to a, since == is a comparison:
> a = (b == c)
> 
> etc
>
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---