C's syntax (was Re: Python Formatted C Converter (PfCC))

[Grant Griffin]

Alex Martelli wrote:
> 
..
> It's therefore pretty silly to lump me into a class of "people
> who don't like C".  I do believe C++ is "a better C than C",
> today, but that is most definitely NOT because of "syntax"
> improvements (indeed, by keeping 99% C compatibility
> while adding stuff, C++ can only further worsen the syntax
> issue).  I've taught C to the staff of research institutions
> (both academic and industrial research outfits), to the
> technical personnel of software houses, and, "pro bono",
> in free continuing-education evening courses sponsored by
> local agencies.  I've personally written and maintained
> hundreds of thousands of lines of C (and C-ish C++) code
> over a span of almost two decades.  I've consulted over
> the fine points of C coding, & C-oriented low-level design;
> I have code-inspected and debugged C code written by
> dozens of excellent programmers, as one of my roles has
> been that of "last-ditch resource" for my employer -- I
> get called in to help find problems that are proving too
> hard for everybody else.  And I've often been very active
> on usenet on C and C++ groups, as I now am here.

Sounds like you have the makings of a "Python Guru Available For
Contract Work". <wink>

...
> But that doesn't mean I have to keep silent when somebody
> baldly asserts that C's syntax is "pretty good".  Yecch.  It's
> most definitely *NOT*!

Just for curiosity, could you be a little more specific here?  Sure, C
has its several known pitfalls.  But those aside, what's so bad about
it's syntax overall?

Having written a lot of Pascal right before I learned C, I found C's
syntax to be quite a relief.  Isn't nice to type "{" rather than
"begin"?  (Or, better yet, to type nothing at all in Python?  <wink>) 
And isn't it nice that the properties of a C "for" loop are very
simply--and flexibly--defined?--no arbitrary restrictions here.  And why
did Pascal ever need that bogus ":=" thing in the first place?
<<designed by a guy who didn't use it much>>  Oh, and the C preprocessor
is a beautiful thing whose absence, in retrospect, makes Pascal seem
absolutely incomplete.

I guess if I were to pick on C's syntax (without emasculating it), about
the only thing I could suggest would be "and" and "or" in place of "&"
and "|". (Oops! I meant "&&" and "||"!)  OK, and I wish TRUE and FALSE
were permenently defined.  

aspiring-to-become-a-'python-guru-available-for-contract-work'
   -m'self-<wink>-ly y'rs,

=g2
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________

Grant R. Griffin                                       g2 at dspguru.com
Publisher of dspGuru                           http://www.dspguru.com
Iowegian International Corporation	      http://www.iowegian.com