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

Scott,

> You keep talking about how the statement terminator will make parsing
> easier for the compiler developers... I don't really think thats an issue,
> here -- they can parse it either way.

Actually, I don't. I've mentioned in maybe two or three posts (replying to
different people), as a possible reason. I completely agree that they can
parse without it. That's why I brought the subject up.

> The real question is what will people be comfortable with?
> Is a syntax better if its more like C or more like perl or more like
> Visual Basic or more like RPG?

Perhaps you're right. I'm still waiting to hear a reasonable answer.


> I think that the best idea is to keep the language like RPG.  Yes, add the
> features (such as free form stuff) that the other languages have had for
> 30 some years already.   Add in the stuff that people like about those
> languages!  Add in the stuff that makes life easier for programmers!
>
> But don't make it SO much like the other languages that we might as well
> use C or VB to begin with...  It needs to still be RPG.

I can't say that I'm crazy about an actual "CF" spec in slot 6, but I can
appreciate your argument.

> But, of course, thats just my opinion.  You're welcome to your own, even
> if you ARE wrong! :-)

What am I wrong about? Asking for a reasonable justification for introducing
the requirement of a terminator into the language? Or my speculation about
why they did it? In the latter case, I'm hoping that I am wrong.

Remember, the semicolon was not a requirement in the original design spec.
What happened that convinced them to make the change?


Regards,

John Taylor
Canada



+---
| 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
+---