Re: Syntax checking for Eval( h ) -- WDSCI-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: Re: Syntax checking for Eval( h )
From: Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 15:12:29 -0500
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l/>
List-post: <mailto:wdsci-l@lists.midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l>, <mailto:wdsci-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/wdsci-l>, <mailto:wdsci-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On 2021-01-21 11:19 a.m., mlazarus wrote:

I don't need that often to make a big difference for me, but I was wondering if that was a deliberate decision to disallow blanks in the extender area?

I know that it was a deliberate decision not to allow blanks between the opcode and the left-parenthesis. But I don't know whether it was a deliberate decision not to allow blanks before the right-parenthesis.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Syntax checking for Eval( h ) , Roger Harman

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.