Re: Syntax and redundancy
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Syntax and redundancy
- From: Rici Lake <lua@...>
- Date: 2005年8月30日 12:49:12 -0500
On 30-Aug-05, at 12:20 PM, Boyko Bantchev wrote:
On 8/30/05, Rici Lake <lua@ricilake.net> wrote:
Try:
DO(i, 0, 9,
int j, k;
j = 2 * i;
k = i + 1;
printf("i = %d, j = %d, k = %d\n", i, j, k);
);
Sure, can't use commas here. Everything has its limitations,
and perfection is but a mirage :)
In this case, I'd have to write int j; int k; instead.
Leading to the likelihood of obscure compiler warnings with this
construct.
Even so, let's contrast:
imac:~ rici$ cat c.test
#include "do.h"
DO(i, 0, 9,
int j = 2 * i;
int k = i + 1;
printf("i = %d, j = %d, k = %d\n", i, j, k);
);
imac:~ rici$ cat lua.test
for i = 0, 9 do
local j, k = 2 * i, i + 1
print(string.format("i = %d, j = %d, k = %d", i, j, k))
end
imac:~ rici$ wc c.test lua.test
6 30 112 c.test
4 29 106 lua.test
OK, without the include it would have favoured C by 10 characters, but
then I could have used a Lua header with:
function printf(...)
print(string.format(...))
end
thereby saving about 13 characters in Lua.
Conclusion: concision is not the issue. The issue is personal taste.
The "conciseness" of C is mostly illusory. :)
- References:
- Syntax and redundancy, Gavin Wraith
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, David Olofson
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Rici Lake
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Aaron Brown
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Adrian Perez
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Rici Lake
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Boyko Bantchev
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Rici Lake
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Boyko Bantchev
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Rici Lake
- Re: Syntax and redundancy, Boyko Bantchev