Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!fwi.uva.nl!kim!delft
From: delft@fwi.uva.nl (Andre van Delft)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: code blocks (Was: Re: Objective-C review)
Message-ID: <1112@carol.fwi.uva.nl>
Date: 28 Jun 90 18:00:14 GMT
References: <12396@june.cs.washington.edu>
Sender: news@fwi.uva.nl
Reply-To: delft@fwi.uva.nl (Andre van Delft)
Organization: Faculteit Wiskunde & Informatica, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Lines: 22

John Maloney writes:
>In reply to Brad Cox's statement:
>> what about a C-based varient of Smalltalk Blocks?
>
>I think that blocks (or "closures", to be technical) are an extremely
>valuable language mechanism. They allow all sorts of customized control
>structures to be synthesized without extending the language semantics at all.

How would code blocks in C look like?
A code block should specify its type and its formal parameters.
The syntax of a normal function declaration without the function identifier
may be appropriate, as in

   aFunctioncall (1, void(){someCode;} )

A problem is in the typeident "void"; when enclosed in parentheses

   aFunctioncall (1, (void)(){someCode;} )

the compiler will see "(void)" as casting.

Any better ideas?