Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pyrdc!pyrnj!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!chpf127
From: chpf127@ut-emx.UUCP (J. Eaton)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: i++, i+=1, i=i+1
Summary: i .ne. i + 1, ever;  rules.
Message-ID: <6036@ut-emx.UUCP>
Date: 16 Sep 88 00:24:21 GMT
References: <13566@mimsy.UUCP> <3629@lanl.gov>
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
Lines: 34

In article <3629@lanl.gov>, jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
> From article <13566@mimsy.UUCP>, by chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek):
> > Also agreed.  Convenience, however, makes all the difference.  I, as
> > a reader, would much rather see as an English description the phrase
> > `add 1 to i' than `evaluate i, evaluate the integer constant 1, add
> > the values together, and store the result in the location named by i'.

    Certainly, since the second description, while complete, is rather
    wordy.  The first, while it is a convenient shorthand, isn't
    sufficient as a description [see below].

> My english description of 'i = i + 1' _is_ "add 1 to i".

    Hmmm.  Mine is:  `Huh?  This can't be.', or:  `No, I'm afraid
    that's false.'   Unless I know more about the rules of the
    language it doesn't really mean a whole lot (neither does ++,
    or +=, or even :-).

    Your description "add 1 to i" only takes care of the
    right hand side, and does nothing to explain what the heck the
    left hand side and the equals sign are doing.  I need to know more
    than "add 1 to i" to carry out all that's required by either C or
    Fortran;  I need the second description given above by Chris.
    But that's wordy, so I'll use a shorthand, i++ or i+=1 in C, or
    even i=i+1 if I happen to be using Fortran.

    In any case, as long as we've agreed on the rules, and have a
    sufficiently clear and unambiguous definition of them, we should
    be all right.  Is the real problem simply that someone in this
    discussion doesn't like the rules?


  J. Eaton                                        Not really doing anything
  UT Austin Department of Chemical Engineering              with chemicals.