On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:55:44 -0600 Chad Perrin <per...@apotheon.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 05:36:32PM +0100, RW wrote: > > > > IMO this is a bad mistake that other languages were quite right not > > to copy - a test shouldn't come after a block of code unless it's > > evaluated after the block (as in repeat...until) > > There are more things in heav'n and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt > of by designers of eagerly evaluated prefix notation languages. And most of them are obscure for good reasons. Just because a a syntax fits into a classification scheme doesn't make it a good idea. Natural languages are mostly driven by spoken usage, in which people firm-up half-formed ideas as they speak - this is not a good model for programming languages. If you are hacking out a quick and dirty script it may be convenient to type the decision after the action, but it don't I think it promotes good quality software. Imperative languages have a natural order of decision followed by action, and code is most easily readable if the syntax doesn't try to subvert that. _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"