Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!warwick!inmos!conor
From: conor@inmos.co.uk (Conor O'Neill)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Proposal for a scientific look at C style choices
Message-ID: <665@brwa.inmos.co.uk>
Date: 4 Jan 89 18:07:05 GMT
References: <eWl9H#2cdgbS=eric@snark.UUCP> <1046@ns.UUCP>
Reply-To: conor@inmos.co.uk (Conor O'Neill)
Organization: INMOS Limited, Bristol, UK.
Lines: 18

In article <1046@ns.UUCP> ddb@ns.UUCP (David Dyer-Bennet) writes:
>I value conservation of vertical space highly, but I don't have the
>rule about braces you propose.  I tend to agree with the poster who
>said that braces are necessary only because the compiler isn't smart
>enough to interpret block structure from the indentation.  Has anybody
>played with such a compiler, by the way?  Or a checker for C which

The OCCAM language relies entirely on indentation for its block
structure.  Each level of indentation MUST be 2 spaces.
(Since OCCAM allows nested functions, etc, any more would push everything
off the right hand side).
I find this very useable, especially when combined with a folding editor,
and it makes it very easy to see the block structure.
-- 
Conor O'Neill, Software Group, INMOS Ltd. 
Disclaimer: All views are my own, not those of INMOS.
(UK) JANET: conor@uk.co.inmos      | UUCP:  (...!mcvax!ukc!inmos!conor)
ARPA:       conor@inmos.co.uk      | Phone: +44 454 616616 x 507