Re: INSPECT and TRAILING syntax


"Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4ce5dlF15a7qgU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Chuck Stevens" <charles.stevens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e3q4le$1lf5$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yes, as I recall it J4 was of the opinion that anything you'd want to do
with TRAILING you could accomplish with existing syntax, even if it
required a "temporary" and an extra statement.

Adding new syntax for functionality that already exists -- particularly
when the syntax for that functionality is pretty straightforward -- adds
complexity to the language without adding functional feature content,
and
for that reason the suggestions to provide TRAILING were not followed.

Interesting.

That being the case...

My best guess for each of the following.

Why was EVALUATE added to the language when IF was already there?

CODASYL 1978. CODASYL was not J4.

Why was SEARCH added when the same effect could be obtained with PERFORM?

CODASYL 1965. CODASYL was not J4.

Why was EXAMINE dropped in favour of INSPECT when they provide the same
functionality?

CODASYL 1969. CODASYL was not J4.

Why were scope delimiters added when we already had full stops?

CODASYL 1978. CODASYL was not J4.

Why was CONTINUE included when EXIT would have done?

CODASYL 1978. CODASYL was not J4.

Why was PICTURE provided in the langage when exactly the same
functionality
was available with CLASS, and SIZE?

CODASYL 1968. CODASYL was not J4.

So much rhetoric, so little time... :-)



.