Newsgroups: comp.lang.dylan
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!yeshua.marcam.com!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!olivea!news.hal.COM!decwrl!adobe!macb022.mv.us.adobe.com!user
From: mhamburg@mv.us.adobe.com (Mark Hamburg)
Subject: Re: Could this be a BAD thing?
Message-ID: <mhamburg-241094105131@macb022.mv.us.adobe.com>
Followup-To: comp.lang.dylan
Sender: usenet@adobe.com (USENET NEWS)
Organization: Adobe Systems, Inc.
References: <37kuhe$p4l@hobbes.cc.uga.edu> <korcuska-1810941305290001@korcuska.ils.nwu.edu> <1994Oct18.134139.1524@news.cs.indiana.edu> <CxzH1J.2Hu@wri.com> <782908888snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 1994 18:51:31 GMT
Lines: 27

In article <782908888snz@wildcard.demon.co.uk>,
cyber_surfer@wildcard.demon.co.uk (Cyber Surfer) wrote:

> In article <CxzH1J.2Hu@wri.com> jbrewer@wri.com "John Brewer" writes:
> 
> > Agreed.  I'd say a majority of the defects I find in C are from using "="
> > instead of "==", rather than vice versa.  I'm much more likely to omit a
> > character than add another.
> 
> If I found this was a problem, then I'd probably just define
> a macro or two. Something like:
> 
> #define set       =
> #define equ       ==
> 
> I like that much more than "if (-1 == code)", which I see in a lot
> of the C books I've read.
> -- 
> "Internet? What's that?" -- Simon "CompuServe" Bates
> http://cyber.sfgate.com/examiner/people/surfer.html

The problem with that is that programmers can still easily write the wrong
thing.  Just because we have some pretty macros doesn't help when a new
programmer comes onto the project and through force of habit uses = or ==
and occasionally gets it wrong.

Mark
