Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: on named blocks concept
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 15:46:13 -0300
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <vggdhl$27v1j$1@dont-email.me>
References: <4b9a47d628677882c26b2518a78571043ef1bdb9@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 19:46:13 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ed0b0cca57889ee8a8eef5f7438bd1ef";
	logging-data="2358323"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19KsQary/quH8FQMjQDSe5se3PqF1UlLkE="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:On8eXHVBH58eX9oFeKCs5BVKfKM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <4b9a47d628677882c26b2518a78571043ef1bdb9@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 3502

On 06/11/2024 13:04, fir wrote:
> if c would have something that i name as named block
> much more interesting options in coding in c would be
> imo avaliable..
> by named block i understood something like
> 
> foo {
>    //code here
> }
> 
> whiuch resembles function , as can be placed in 'global'
> (module level) space but also could be placed locally in
> functions
> 
> int foo() {
>    a { }
>    b { }
> }
> 
> then it could be called internally
> 
> int foo() {
>    a { }
>    b { }
> 
>    int x = a()*a()*b(); //though imo () probab;ly should be optionall
> }
> 
> or externally
> 
> foo.a()
> 
> those blocks probably should have acces to local variables of
> parent functions or parant block so it yelds imo to conclusion
> that local variables and arguments should be by default static
> (those stack variables by default are bad idea imo.. its kinda optimisation
> needed whan you got 4kb RAM but on bigger machines this optimisation is 
> bad imo)
> 
> if so mant things can be done with this blocks probably, im not exactly
> sure what exactly
> 
> ona assembly label blocks by defauld probably be done by
> 
> name:
>    //...
>    ret
> 
>   so then can be reused though some version to call it in place
>   of definitions could be also avaliable imo (something like
>   a{}() in a sense but better looking (this looks to bad)
> 
>   overally those named block should be also united with function
>   so they become the same if use on them the functionality of
>   passing arguments and returning variables
> 
>   foo {
>     a {}
> 
>     int x, y = a(1,2)
>   }
> 
>   though i maybe not sure how to add this mechanism
>   possibly som,ething liek this (until something better could be found)
> 
>   a
>   {
>    in int c;
>    in int d;
>    out int x = c+d;
>    out int y = c-d;
>   }
> 
>   or
>   a( int c, int d)
>   {
>    out int x = c+d;
>    out int y = c-d;
>   }
> 
> as all c d x y are static you may call a() without any or
> with any set int x, y = a(1) int x = a(1,2) and compiler
> would generate the assigments (how to call it on assembly level us
> wuite clear, not fully clear is what syntax in language to use
> 
> this concept is yet not fully build yet but what i descrbed her i guess 
> is okay


Names loops (only loops) were proposed to C2Y.

https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n3355.htm