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, MSGID_RANDY 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: Robert Dewar Subject: Re: C like op= proposal Date: 1999/08/18 Message-ID: <7pd6th$2qj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 514031266 References: <37B7D172.DCE02FFA@Maths.UniNe.CH> <87emh2l218.fsf@antinea.enst.fr> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x42.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Aug 18 02:48:19 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-08-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Andi Kleen wrote: > [1] To attribute correctly this is an old argument from, I believe > Dennis Ritchie, in a prehistoric article about C. I think he's right. No, this is older than C, these notations were around in Algol variants (as +:=) before C existed. Note that Algol-68 has these operators. But there are many other factors in the Ada decision. Please go look up old threads, I don't feel like going over this stuff again myself :-) Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.