Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.lang.pascal.borland,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.c++.leda,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.basic.visual.3rdparty,alt.computer.workshop.live
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!bcstec!ced
From: ced@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Charles DeRykus)
Subject: Re: PROGRAMERS OF ANY LANGUAGE
Message-ID: <DpxA0t.3vy@bcstec.ca.boeing.com>
Organization: The Boeing Company
References: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960329010021.13209A-100000@harvey> <316A6189.4287@wight.hursley.ibm.com> <4kg58c$djh@kalypso.cybercom.net> <4kqe6q$1tm@innocence.interface-business.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:22:04 GMT
Lines: 31
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.smalltalk:37366 comp.lang.perl.misc:27045 comp.lang.pascal.borland:15280 comp.lang.eiffel:13722 comp.lang.cobol:9280 comp.lang.c++.leda:844 comp.lang.c:184376 comp.lang.basic.visual.3rdparty:12596

In article <4kqe6q$1tm@innocence.interface-business.de>,
J Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> wrote:

J>stok@kalypso.cybercom.net (Michael J. Stok) writes:
J>
  >> The {}s shouldn't be optional!  That's the route Perl took with blocks 
  >> after for, if, while, else etc.  Just because C and similar languages 
  >> have the "optimisation" that they the {}s are optional doesn't mean it's 
  >> right :-)
  >
J> Just because Perl allows for the "optimisation" to put the "if" before
J> or after the statement, and mandates the curlies _for one of the options_,
J> doesn't make the code better per se. :-)
J>

You must admit though that it's lovely to be able to  say either 

  "If you really love me, feed me artichokes". 

or,

  "Feed me artichokes if you really love me". 



Sometimes there's expressive power in saying one rather than
the other. Besides, love needs a lot of latitude :)

-
Charles DeRykus
ced@carios2.ca.boeing.com
