Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!sci.ccny.cuny.edu!phri!roy
From: roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: He's not the only one at it again!
Message-ID: <1990Jul30.143530.24295@phri.nyu.edu>
Date: 30 Jul 90 14:35:30 GMT
References: <25630@cs.yale.edu> <58091@lanl.gov> <3478@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> <25681@cs.yale.edu>
Sender: news@phri.nyu.edu (News System)
Organization: Public Health Research Institute, New York City
Lines: 16

zenith-steven@cs.yale.edu (Steven Ericsson Zenith) writes:
> The use of := distinguishes assignment from equality [...] and IMHO is a
> much nicer solution to the C hack == used to ovecome the same problem.

	I agree that differentiating assignment from equality testing is
good, but why is using {:=, =} (no, that's not some kind of overgrown
smiley face!) any better or worse than using {=, ==}?  One might argue that
one is easier to type, or less likely to cause typos, or something like
that, but to call C's version a hack seems like you're overreacting a bit.
If you are going to invent a multi-ascii-character token for assignment,
why not "<-"?
--
Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy
"Arcane?  Did you say arcane?  It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"