I fail to see how making the two similar constant parsers more identical is an 
obscene parody of some other language.

FWIW, I am not a young-un. I am competent in assembler -- my first professional 
language -- and now quite competent in C++. I am not a religious bigot. Each 
language has its place. I am writing assembler at the moment -- it's better 
suited to the task at hand. (Well, writing an e-mail at this very moment ...)

Charles


-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of John Walker
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 11:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 18 Mar 2017 to 19 Mar 2017 (#2017-31)

That is so, isn't it.  And now, as fewer and fewer true assembler programmers 
are found, more and more C or C++ or Java programmers will seek to distort 
Assembler into some obscene parody of their favorite language.   If IBM allows 
this, it will make life for real Assembler programmers more difficult as they 
have to relearn AND recode old Assembler code to fit into the C/C++/Java 
paradigms.  I grant that the young-uns don't like Assembler, but I still can't 
accept the unnecessary change solely because 'old = unacceptable' among the 
children. 

Reply via email to