Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #2782
| From | Jan Ziak <0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? |
| Date | 2021-12-30 13:47 -0800 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <21-12-033@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <21-12-003@comp.compilers> <21-12-017@comp.compilers> <21-12-022@comp.compilers> <21-12-026@comp.compilers> |
On Thursday, December 30, 2021 at 7:56:15 PM UTC+1, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > When I started programming from nothing, I saw BASIC examples in a > book which was doing things like: > > 10 X = 2 > 20 X = X + 1 > > The only language with formulas that I was coming from was math. > > So, I thought, what? How can X be equal to X + 1; you cannot solve > this absurdity! > > From then I knew that the people who program computers to understand > symbols are free thinkers who make them mean anything they want. "X = X + Y" means "X[t+1] = X[t] + Y[t]" where t is time. Time had to be omitted from the notation of the BASIC programming language because otherwise the source code would consume a much larger amount of computer memory and it would complicate GOTO and FOR/NEXT statements. -atom [Interesting take. In reality, of couse, BASIC borrowed that from Fortran. Algol used := for assignment, different from = for equality comparison. -John]
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2021-12-29 18:48 +0000
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? Jan Ziak <0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@gmail.com> - 2021-12-29 16:05 -0800
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2021-12-30 18:00 +0000
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2021-12-30 20:08 +0000
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2021-12-29 18:41 -0800
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2021-12-30 18:14 +0000
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? Jan Ziak <0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@gmail.com> - 2021-12-30 13:47 -0800
Re: What does = mean, was Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Jan Ziak <0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@gmail.com> - 2021-12-30 17:10 -0800
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2022-01-03 19:51 +0000
Re: for or against equality, was Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2022-01-03 21:07 -0800
Re: for or against equality, was Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2022-01-04 19:23 +0000
Re: for or against equality, was Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2022-01-04 13:26 -0800
Re: Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Why are languages usually defined and implemented with ambiguous grammars? gah4 <gah4@u.washington.edu> - 2021-12-30 13:40 -0800
Re: why do people choose a language, was Why are ambiguous grammars usually a bad idea? Jan Ziak <0xe2.0x9a.0x9b@gmail.com> - 2021-12-30 20:19 -0800
csiph-web