Semicolons: mostly unnecessary?

[AJ]

"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:op.u16lelraeav7ka at localhost.localdomain...
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:46:37 -0400, AJ <aj at nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:op.u16ild2leav7ka at localhost.localdomain...
>>> On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:42:31 -0400, AJ <aj at nospam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Apparently it is NOT off-topic (someone else said: "hey, all you guys 
>>>> who
>>>> don't want semicolons: find another language or create your own!").
>>>> While I
>>>> wasn't proposing to change D, I wasn't NOT suggesting it, necessarily,
>>>> for
>>>> consideration in some version down the line (or what D could maybe 
>>>> morph
>>>> into).
>>>
>>> Your suggestion that you were not proposing to change the D language is
>>> either supremely misleading, or flat out lying.
>>>
>>> The original post said "Why not eliminate the requirement for semicolon
>>> statement terminators."  If you didn't mean D, then what the hell are 
>>> you
>>> talking about?
>>
>> I could have almost equivalently said: "Why does D require semicolons as
>> statement terminators on single-statement lines?". Obviously I'm thinking
>> that the semicolon used as noted may very well be redundant. I just 
>> wanted
>> "proof" one way or the other.
>
> So misleading then.

No, not misleading: you misinterpreted and made eroneous assumption. 
Obviously I am thinking that it's just carryover artifact from C++. But I 
may be thinking that with too little information (I've never implemented a 
language with or without semicolon statement terminators), so I was asking 
"Why?".

> The "equivalent" statement implies much less action  than your original 
> statement.

Neither imply any action. If you want to misinterpret it that way, that's up 
to you. Both simply ask "Why?".

> We have fallen victim to some English  subtleties it appears.

You are the only victim here: You are a victim of your own assumptions.

>
>>>
>>> This is a very very old argument.  It's been argued about 5 times on 
>>> this
>>> newsgroup alone.
>>
>> I had no idea! How long ago? I'll go back and read the threads and with 
>> even
>> more interest now. I assumed that the semicolon, used as noted, was just
>> carry-over from C/C++ rather than a re-evaluated and adopted-by-D thing.
>
> search for semicolon, I'm sure you'll find stuff.

I will!

>
>>> Find another topic.
>>
>> Maybe you shouldn't read threads you are not interested in? In that 
>> regard,
>> find another thread. :P
>
> I'm just trying to save you time and effort.

Uh huh.

> If you want to argue tired  old arguments,

Oh, you were arguing? About what? I just asked "Why?".

> then why not start a thread on how emacs is tons better  than vi?

Start your own thread if you just want to argue. I'm looking for answers.

> You'd get the same effect.  In other words, my statement was a  tip, not 
> an attack ;)

Bullshit. You meant it as "an order" and you know it. :P