Xref: utzoo comp.lang.misc:1469 comp.lang.c:9488 Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!batcomputer!itsgw!imagine!pawl14.pawl.rpi.edu!jefu From: jefu@pawl14.pawl.rpi.edu (Jeffrey Putnam) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Block Closure Message-ID: <732@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU> Date: 20 Apr 88 10:49:16 GMT References: <2853@enea.se> <2400014@otter.hple.hp.com> <918@rlgvax.UUCP> <757@l.cc.purdue.edu> Sender: news@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU Reply-To: jefu@pawl14.pawl.rpi.edu (Jeffrey Putnam) Organization: RPI Public Access Workstation Lab - Troy, NY Lines: 23 All this discussion about which delimiters we should be using seems to me rather off the mark. (I personally see nothing wrong with either the C block "{...}" or the Algol 68 "if ... fi" etc.) I think that what is really needed is better editors and appropriate software to handle transformations. That is, if I write with "{...}" in a syntax smart editor, there is no reason why it could not be transformed to "begin...end" or any other pair demanded by the formal language description. Indeed, two people working on the same program might see it in quite different ways. In a nice bitmap oriented editor, blocks might be indicated by drawing lines around the block, drawing a vertical line in front of it, or even by changing color or font (:-). I think we are forgetting - or not yet realizing - that the kinds of things demanded by a language definition is not necessarily what is presented to the programmer. Time and space do not permit me to describe what i would like to see in my fantasy editor, but suffice it to say that i dont think delimiters would ever appear (unless requested). jeff putnam jefu@pawl.rpi.edu -or- jeff_putnam%rpitsmts@itsgw.rpi.edu "People would rather believe a simple lie than the complex truth."