Welcome, and thanks for the comment.
My post was actually agnostic on the issue. That is, I think the line
should be drawn where the language designer wants it drawn -- and this
may well be in different places on different occasions. For example, I
could imagine a language where prevention of security issues was
*everything*, and which found it best to require explicit statement
grouping and terminators.
The question I was intending to raise is, why are languages being
designed with parsers that do not give us the power to make choices?
Another way to put it is that I'm trying to build a great musical
instrument, and what kind of music you play, or even whether you call it
a fiddle or a violin, is up to you.
--jeffrey
On 02/26/2014 12:44 PM, shaun.griffith.1...@gmail.com wrote:
You go on about the parser at length. Yet humans also have to read it.
I think in many languages, statement terminators and other syntactic
sugars are there for the humans.
For example, Python drives me a bit crazy, because you can't cut and
paste code directly -- you have to worry about indentation, which may
not be the same from source to destination (even within the same
file). And revision control systems often merge things wrongly, and
quietly ignore it.
On the other hand, C's null-terminated strings are there for the
executable, and seem to cause more problems than it solves.
Where's the balance? Where do we draw the (new)line?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "marpa parser" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to marpa-parser+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "marpa
parser" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to marpa-parser+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
