Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Walter
Bright<[email protected]> wrote:
Bill Baxter wrote:
If it's internal to the parse tree can't you make the syntax whatever you
want?
Something like (expr1 __exprSequencer expr2) should do just fine, right?
No reason it has to be a precious one-character symbol syntax.
What if you're writing a program that generates D code?
..then you'd have it generate multiple statements?
Your recursive function may not have any access to the parents of the
expression node it is working on.
Really, I'm not seeing the justification here!
You should come to my compiler seminar, then! http:www.astoriaseminar.com
Without any way to sequence expressions in place, a lot of manipulation
becomes much more complicated. Comma expressions have been around a long
time, they work well, and are often used.
