Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!ukc!warwick!cudcv
From: cudcv@daisy.warwick.UUCP (Rob McMahon)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: What should be added to C
Message-ID: <149@daisy.warwick.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 1-Jun-86 10:23:35 EDT
Article-I.D.: daisy.149
Posted: Sun Jun  1 10:23:35 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 3-Jun-86 23:44:54 EDT
References: <1462@mmintl.UUCP> <5498@alice.uUCp> <1497@mmintl.UUCP> <450@cad.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: cudcv@daisy.warwick.ac.uk (Rob McMahon)
Organization: Computer Unit, Warwick University, UK
Lines: 22

In article <450@cad.BERKELEY.EDU> faustus@cad.UUCP writes:
>In article <1497@mmintl.UUCP>, franka@mmintl.UUCP writes:
>
> > Confusing "=" and "==" in if statements is a common mistake.  If "=" is not
> > a legal operator, this error becomes very rare.
>
>It's also an extra character to type...
>

Are you suggesting we all use single character variable names, or maybe
{letter}{digit} when we need more than 26 ?  I think phasing in ":=" over a
number of years is an excellent idea, first providing a switch to turn on
warnings about "=", then always warning, then maybe giving errors.  The
trouble is "if (a = f())" is just too useful, if you could write
"if (a := f())" it becomes readable too (".. a becomes equal to ..." instead
of "... a equals ...").
-- 
UUCP:   ...!mcvax!ukc!warwick!cudcv
JANET:  cudcv@uk.ac.warwick.daisy
ARPA:   cudcv@daisy.warwick.ac.uk
PHONE:  +44 204 523037
Rob McMahon, Computer Unit, Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, England