Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<507ef9c61012949178c93f961e9389b6@www.novabbs.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: text in programming languages, Unicode in strings Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 17:46:49 +0000 Organization: Rocksolid Light Message-ID: <507ef9c61012949178c93f961e9389b6@www.novabbs.org> References: <v0s17o$2okf4$2@dont-email.me> <v2anov$11l1$2@gal.iecc.com> <2024May19.175249@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <v2df6i$3ghp4$1@dont-email.me> <v2dju2$11ed$1@gal.iecc.com> <9a6583437121418f0b8446fd6d979461@www.novabbs.org> <v2e85u$3l2k7$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1702138"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$w/c6Ilutp/9UuXQG5e3Hw.4CIxfpiaJ4Pw.NHjWC/bH.mW1PPQkoa X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8 Bytes: 2978 Lines: 48 Stephen Fuld wrote: > MitchAlsup1 wrote: >> John Levine wrote: >> >> > According to Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid>: >> > > > That may have been the idea, but I think the idea was wrong. >> > > >> > > I think few would disagree with both parts of that. I certainly >> > > wouldn't. But I give the designers some slack as, in the late >> > > 1950s, there was lettle knowledge about programming languages to >> > > go on. Now, the mistake is obvious. >> >> > COBOL is older than Fortran, and back in the day there were plenty >> > of people who were outraged at I=I+1 which is mathematically absurd >> > for the >> > physicicts and mathematicians who were Fortran's early users. >> >> > Algol gave us various kinds of := which were supposed to be better. >> >> > > Yes, the COMPUTE statement. i.e. COMPUTE I = I + 1 >> >> > You could do that, but I think this is at least as clear: >> >> > ADD 1 TO PRODUCT-INDEX. >> >> > Don't forget that while COBOL's control structures were quite weak, >> > its data structures still look pretty good. Everything in a C or >> > C++ structure comes from COBOL by way of PL/I. >> >> >> Picture data structures ?? > I'm not sure what you are saying here. PICTURE x $999,999,999.00; > While Picture clauses are not > in C nor C++, John never cleamed they were. His clain was that those > features that were included came from COBOL. e.g. nested structs, > array of structs, structs of arrays, etc. > And I miss some equivalent of picture clauses in C every time I see, > including in this NG, a number consisting of a string of say 8 or 9 or > more digits without the every three digit separator character, which > sure makes reading such numbers easier. :-(