Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!seismo!nbires!rcd
From: rcd@nbires.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: compound statements
Message-ID: <463@opus.nbires.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 16-Jul-86 00:18:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: opus.463
Posted: Wed Jul 16 00:18:17 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jul-86 22:35:11 EDT
References: <5281@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> <800015@ccvaxa>
Organization: NBI,Inc, Boulder CO
Lines: 23
Summary: null statement and 0???

> Dijkstra argues that making the null statement explicit, `skip', with
> defined semantics, may be as important for computer science as the
> invention of zero was for arithmetic. 

Mmph.  That's either a misattribution or one of the craziest analogies I'VE
ever heard.  I'd like to think that I can guess what the semantics of the
null statement might be (!), so I'm puzzled.  Either the semantics ARE
obvious (nothing) in which case they're uninteresting, or they're far from
obvious in which case something is seriously wrong (because a simple but
un-obvious construct will get your users in trouble).

So to get the effect equivalent to "zero" out of the null statement, do we
invent some sort of "positional notation" for statements?!?!

(Seriously, a context for the Dijkstra statement would be appreciated.)

> ...OK, who's going to tell me I'm brain damaged now? I hope that they can do
> arithmetic in Roman numerals...

Was this just a coincidental .signature?  Curiously relevant.
-- 
Dick Dunn	{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd		(303)444-5710 x3086
   ...At last it's the real thing...or close enough to pretend.