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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 108717,ea99940253996e3e
X-Google-Attributes: gid108717,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,ea99940253996e3e
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,ea99940253996e3e
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ea99940253996e3e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-08 09:30:25 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!msc1.onvoy!onvoy.com!news.mmm.com!not-for-mail
From: Programmer Dude <Chris@Sonnack.com>
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.programming,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ISO Studies of underscores vs MixedCase in Ada or C++
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 11:22:25 -0500
Organization: Wrenn Productions, Ltd
Message-ID: <3F8439C1.F39C8DC0@Sonnack.com>
References: <2cfd1a4e.0309252032.3e3c0a1a@posting.google.com>
 <blg92l$bnh$1@news.apple.com> <3F7C37C3.B5469C33@Sonnack.com>
 <blku0j$pos$1@news.apple.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.10.179.242
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.software-eng:90 comp.programming:575
 comp.lang.c++:1483 comp.lang.ada:474
Date: 2003-10-08T11:22:25-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Peter Ammon wrote:

>> classmethod :
>>         access_specifier
>>         method_type_specifier
>>         method_return_type_specifier
>>         method_declaration
>>         method_body
> 
> You've piqued my interest, since I'm the first to admit that my
> grammar specifications are hard to read.
> 
> Where do you put the action in the above code?
> 
> classmethod :
>         access_specifier
>         method_type_specifier
>         method_return_type_specifier
>         method_declaration
>         method_body
>         { doSomething(); }

I thought this was a grammar definition?  I'd have thought that

	method_body :== { doSomething(); }

But if they are different, the way you did it seems fine to me.

> What if there's more than one reduction possible?
> 
> classmethod :
>         access_specifier
>         method_type_specifier
>         method_return_type_specifier
>         method_declaration
>         method_body
>          { doSomething(); }
>       |  something_else
>         another_thing
>         even_more
>         blah_blah
>         { doSomethingElse(); }

Probably break them up in some fashion:

class-method:
	class-method-normal |
	class-method-extended

class-method-normal:
	access-specifier
	method-type-specifier
	method-return-type-specifier
	method-declaration
	method-body
	
class-method-extended:
	something-else
	another-thing
	even-more
	blah-blah


>> (In proportional fonts, hyphens are usually skinnier than
>> underscores and (to my eye) make the text more readable.
>> It's not as noticable with monospace fonts, but I think the
>> lower example looks better (read: more readable :-).)
> 
> Agreed!  I wish that more languages allowed hyphen use in
> identifiers. Dylan is the only one I can think of off the
> top of my head.

Others have already mentioned Lisp, so I don't have to!
(Well,... *didn't* have to...  :-)

-- 
|_ CJSonnack <Chris@Sonnack.com> _____________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL  |
|_____________________________________________|_______________________|