Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!lll-winken!uunet!kddlab!titcca!sragwa!wsgw!socslgw!diamond!diamond
From: diamond@diamond.csl.sony.junet (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Language Design, or: is C's Grammar Context Free
Keywords: BNF, Grammars, Silliness
Message-ID: <10162@socslgw.csl.sony.JUNET>
Date: 13 Apr 89 05:54:52 GMT
References: <5200040@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <12443@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <920@m10ux.ATT.COM> <9313@dasys1.UUCP>
Sender: news@csl.sony.JUNET
Reply-To: diamond@diamond. (Norman Diamond)
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Lines: 20

In article <9313@dasys1.UUCP> aj-mberg@dasys1.UUCP (Micha Berger) writes:
>> Consider the following in C, however:
>
>>	. . . { T (x); . . . }
> 
>> How should the construct be parsed?
>
>It would have to be an expression, since anything within brackets ain't a
>decleration. This isn't Pascal kiddees, all functions are global.

Since Micha Berger is so convinced of C's superiority, maybe he should
learn it.  Anything within brackets is a declaration until the end of
the declarations, and then statements (expressions) until the closing
bracket.  This isn't Pascal kiddee; intuition and aesthetics are not
welcome here.

Norman Diamond, Sony Computer Science Lab (diamond%csl.sony.jp@relay.cs.net)
  The above opinions are my own.   |  Why are programmers criticized for
  If they're also your opinions,   |  re-inventing the wheel, when car
  you're infringing my copyright.  |  manufacturers are praised for it?