Austin Hastings: > A similar trade-off exists with the statement terminating semicolon. In > this case, it involves the number of statements per line: > > A language that terminates statements can ignore whitespace, allowing > multiple statements per line and statements that span multiple lines.
Still possible with optional semicolons (as you say later): a = 1 b = \ 2 c = 3; d = 4 > The vast majority of languages have opted to terminate statements. Most of the younger scripting languages didn't. > Probably the best argument is that encountering a > semicolon (or full stop, in COBOL) is a positive indicator rather than a > negative one. "I see a semicolon. I know the statement is over." as > opposed to "I don't see a continuation marker, so it's likely that the > statement is over, although it could be tabbed way off to the right or > something." Your semicolon could also be tabbed way off, so you can't be sure there either. "I see no semicolon, so it's likely that the statement continues on the next line". > So line termination doesn't gain a punctuation character No problem I think. > and causes the ends of lines to be uncertain. It's exactly as certain as with semicolon termination. See above. > It does reduce typing, for the small crowd of people that wouldn't > just use them anyway because they use them in every other language. > I think the lack of value here outweights the "savings" of one character > per line. But even if the advantage of line termination is low (some characters saved, some people might say it looks cleaner), I cannot see any advantage of semicolon termination. -- Thomas Wittek http://gedankenkonstrukt.de/ Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]