Reduce need of backslash

[Stephen Horne]

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:49:59 -0400, Nicolas Fleury
<nid_oizo at yahoo.com_removethe_> wrote:

>Stephen Horne wrote:
>> Basically, when I need to break an expression over multiple lines, the
>> odds are that it already has parentheses anyway. And I wouldn't indent
>> that way anyway, I'd do it as...
>> 
>> a = (  firstitem
>>      + seconditem
>>      + (  thirditem
>>         * fourthitem
>>        )
>>     )
>
>But that's indentation anyway.  If the rule would be "all lines with a 
>superior indentation are part of the previous line", would that work? 

Probably yes, but it has been discussed before and never generated a
clear enough choice or sufficient will to make the change.

My personal preference would be closer to Haskells offside rule,
allowing me to write something similar to my example above but with
indentation reducing the need for parentheses. But it really isn't an
important issue IMO.


-- 
Steve Horne

steve at ninereeds dot fsnet dot co dot uk