From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,10444cff97404845 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Gautier Subject: Re: C like op= proposal Date: 1999/08/18 Message-ID: <37BAD79C.1DB32DD1@maths.unine.ch>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 514256963 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <37B7D172.DCE02FFA@Maths.UniNe.CH> <87emh2l218.fsf@antinea.enst.fr> <7pd6th$2qj$1@nnrp1.deja.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-08-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: > Also note that a request for opinions doesn't constitute a suggestion for > a language change. I prefer [] for arrays too, but there's no way I'd > suggest that change! I was curious about whether other Ada users would > find some notation like this *more readable*. I doubt that adding > syntactic gadgetry like this at this stage in Ada's life is worth the > effort. Ada's progeny are a different story. My opinion: the "+=" and such notation are not readable at all. The main advantage of Ada is that you can spell the instructions and it means something. It's important for many areas of programming where you have to re-read and understand your (or worse: other's) code. Adding these notations would be a leap back to these 1960s cryptic, write-only, macro-assemblers made for experimenting new operating systems and now (too often) used in improper areas like scientific programming or large-scale projects... I prefer to keep the +=*%^$ notations for such applets: ================================================================== #include float o=0.075,h=1.5,T,r,O,l,I;int _,L=80,s=3200;main(){for(;s%L|| (h-=o,T= -2),s;4 -(r=O*O)<(l=I*I)|++ _==L&&write(1,(--s%L?_