Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Michel Fortin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 2010-05-03 05:53:34 -0400, Jacob Carlborg <[email protected]> said:
foo((int i) { writeln(i); });
I agree that the semicolon looks out of place for one-line function
bodies.
The semicolon could be made optional for the last statement in a block.
Just have it be a statement separator instead of a terminator. That'd be
consistent with commas in enums, array literals, and function arguments.
foo((int i) { writeln(i) });
Yea, that's a case of optional-semicolon that even I'd like to have (And
I've suggested it before).
Actually that doesn't work as well as one might expect. In the Cecil
language, the return type of a function would depend on whether it ended
with a semicolon (void if present, something else if absent). Not very
robust.
Andrei
