Contextualizing keywords

Ary Borenszweig ary at esperanto.org.ar
Mon Aug 3 05:10:49 PDT 2009


Max Samukha escribió:
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:41:53 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> 
>> Robert Fraser wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> Oliver Hoog wrote:
>>>>> Robert Fraser schrieb:
>>>>>> Chad J wrote:
>>>>>>> This makes things more difficult for syntax highlighters.  A number of
>>>>>>> them will just not work correctly because they don't actually parse 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> code.
>>>>>>> That's all I've got.
>>>>>> Ehhh.... How often will you actually use the identifiers? The point 
>>>>>> isn't to make them free for use, it's more to reduce the number of 
>>>>>> people bitching about how many keywords there are.
>>>>> I guess they would still keep complaining since the number of 
>>>>> available keywords to be remembered doesn't decrease.
>>>> There are a million words in the English language, so it's not likely 
>>>> that we'll run short of identifier space in the conceivable future :-)
>>>>
>>>> The real problem is remembering the keywords.
>>> Eh? I disagree -- think about how many uses of "static" there are, or 
>>> the wars about "enum". Overloading keywords is MUCH more confusing than 
>>> reserving another word.
>> Confession:
>>
>> I've never, ever been confused by the use of "static". Not even once, 
>> and not even when I was a complete beginner. I have always taken in the 
>> numerous jokes related to "static" with the politely faked, resigned 
>> smile of someone who knows will never really "get" it. And deep in my 
>> heart of hearts, whenever a "static" joke comes about, the belief that 
>> I'm an outcast sinks in a bit deeper.
>>
>> Guess it's time for me to join the Static-Impaired Anonymous...
>>
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> I dare say I don't believe you. What about static (aka fixed-size)
> arrays that can be allocated non-statically on stack or statically in
> the static data segment? So we have static static arrays and static
> non-static arrays. If it's not a confusion, I don't know what it is.
> 
> The D specs at
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/arrays.html#static-arrays continue
> the tradition. Please read "Static Initialization of Static Arrays".
> The section confusingly claims that static arrays are not static when
> they appear in a local context without 'static' modifier.

What does that mean? I don't get it...



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list