Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!umd5!eneevax!noise
From: noise@eneevax.UUCP (Johnson Noise)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: == vs =
Message-ID: <1202@eneevax.UUCP>
Date: 1 Feb 88 14:57:36 GMT
References: <11523@brl-adm.ARPA>
Sender: news@eneevax.UUCP
Reply-To: noise@eneevax.umd.edu.UUCP (Johnson Noise)
Organization: Elec. Eng. Dept., U of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
Lines: 25

In article <11523@brl-adm.ARPA> dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) writes:
>In article <558@cerebus.UUCP> Greg Shubin <cerebus!gregs> writes:
>>     brain thinks:  "if x is equal to y then ... "
>
>      brain applies "C-mode" transform to above thought to
>      convert the abstract logical expression to C code.
>      oops, there's a bug in the transform causing ...
>
>>     fingers type:  "if (x = y) ..." instead of "if (x == y) ..."
>
>Does it make sense to change the language because some people have a
>problem making the abstract <=> real transformation?
>

	No.  I don't understand what the big problem is about = and ==.
I made that mistake once and only once (it took 15 mins. to find it, but
I never did it again) when I was still learning the language.  If I can
remember what to use when, I should think most people can.  In fact,
one of the main reasons I started using C was the = and not :=. := has
got to be the most ugly, most bogus pile of sh*t ever invented, but that's
my personal opinion.  With all this deal about ANSI and all, most of it is
not too dangerous (although I was satisfied with K & R); but if I ever, EVER
have to type := I will be very, VERY dissapointed.
	For the most part, I am (and always will be) an assembly programmer.
I thought that most C programmers were.  Now it seems that everybody wants
in on it and I think the prime directive may be compromised. Sad, isn't it?