Re: String concatenation design
- From: "Rob Thorpe" <robert.thorpe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Mar 2006 01:20:58 -0800
andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Rob Thorpe wrote:
Don't do what C, C++ and Perl do, and have 15 levels with slightly
different priorities. These languages are popular but their precendence
levels aren't.
What evidence is there to support your claim that the precedence levels
are unpopular?
"Since C has some unexpected precedence rules, expressions involvingFrom the Indhill style guide:
mixed operators should be parenthesized." & later "There is a time and
place for the binary comma operator, but generally it should be
avoided."
The GNU style guide is milder:
"Instead, use extra parentheses so that the indentation [of
expressions] shows the nesting:"
Plus I've never read a program of any length that used many of the
precedence levels at once. And most programs I've read seems to ignore
many of them, often relying on * . -> + - * / && || = == only.
Think about this: can you remember what they all are? For C and C++?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: Arthur J. O'Dwyer
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: andy
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: Ben Pfaff
- Re: String concatenation design
- References:
- String concatenation design
- From: Anton Treuenfels
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: Rob Thorpe
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: Oliver Wong
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: Rob Thorpe
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: andy
- String concatenation design
- Prev by Date: Re: Cannot understand the following codes
- Next by Date: Re: Subtract smaller or larger number from x?
- Previous by thread: Re: String concatenation design
- Next by thread: Re: String concatenation design
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|