On 29 May 2013 20:55, Frank Shearar <[email protected]> wrote: > On 29 May 2013 19:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <[email protected]> wrote: >> I see no harm in that. >> >> It might be misleading, > > Well, that's _exactly_ the harm in that. > so don't write it like that :)
I actually like the fact that i can put comment anywhere i want, and it doesn't disrupts the parser. Of course, it turns to be a problem, when you think that something must be represented by a single token but it cannot, because it split by comment. But to me it is much more important that i can put comment anywhere i like, without thinking "oh.. it may not compile". > frank > >> but who in his/her sane mind would write like that? > >> Apparently the parser removes all the comments before doing anything else. >> >> Esteban A. Maringolo >> >> >> 2013/5/29 Nicolas Cellier <[email protected]> >>> >>> Ah, nice, we can write in french ;) 221" millions "355" mille "799 >>> >>> >>> 2013/5/29 Gisela Decuzzi <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2013/5/29 Frank Shearar <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>> How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12? >>>> >>>> >>>> Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange >>>> combinations... >>>> >>>> I think this shouldn't be valid but since there are tests verifying the >>>> behavior maybe there was a reason (more than the scanner we are using is >>>> skipping all the comments without letting the parser decide) >>>> >>> >> > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
