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: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: C like op= proposal Date: 1999/08/17 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 514076797 References: <37B7D172.DCE02FFA@Maths.UniNe.CH> <87emh2l218.fsf@antinea.enst.fr> <7pd6th$2qj$1@nnrp1.deja.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: nntp1.ba.best.com 934950814 227 bpr@206.184.139.136 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-08-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Robert Dewar wrote: > 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 :-) Yes, but Algol-68 didn't have a pseudo-variable for representing the left hand side, and I haven't seen this approach discussed here. If it was, please give a pointer of some kind to the thread. 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. -- Brian