Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1521
| Path | csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end |
|---|---|
| From | Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> |
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: parsability |
| Date | Sun, 08 Feb 2015 20:49:45 +0100 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Lines | 24 |
| Sender | news@iecc.com |
| Approved | comp.compilers@iecc.com |
| Message-ID | <15-02-019@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <10-11-017@comp.compilers> <15-02-009@comp.compilers> <15-02-011@comp.compilers> <15-02-017@comp.compilers> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | news.iecc.com |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 8bit |
| X-Trace | miucha.iecc.com 1423440715 83542 2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970 (9 Feb 2015 00:11:55 GMT) |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@iecc.com |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Mon, 9 Feb 2015 00:11:55 +0000 (UTC) |
| Keywords | parse |
| Posted-Date | 08 Feb 2015 19:11:55 EST |
| X-submission-address | compilers@iecc.com |
| X-moderator-address | compilers-request@iecc.com |
| X-FAQ-and-archives | http://compilers.iecc.com |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.compilers:1521 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Robin Vowels schrieb: > A number of special characters have traditionally acquired multiple uses. > The asterisk, parentheses, apostrophe, colon, period, feature heavily > on account of the limited number of characters available in equipment > of the era (48-character set, 60 character set, etc.) and continue to do so > for historical reasons. IMO the real and persistent limit is the keyboard, with a limited number of keys. Increasing the number of keys is not a solution, because then it may be more time consuming to find an special key, instead of reusing a character or typing more characters. Why didn't APL succeed in the long run? OTOH there exist languages (and speakers) of languages with bigger character sets, like Japanese or Chinese. What if people, used to according input methods (character composition...), started to invent and use dedicated glyphs for keywords and operators, in new programming languages? Wouldn't this prevent coders of other *natural* languages from using such a *programming* language, for its unreadability and complicated keying? DoDi
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Choosing a parser for Mathematica input fateman@gmail.com - 2015-02-05 08:08 -0800
parsability (was: Choosing a parser for Mathematica input) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-02-06 00:05 +0000
Re: parsability and human factors "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2015-02-07 12:45 +0000
Re: parsability and human factors glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-02-08 10:32 +0000
Re: parsability and human factors "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2015-02-10 12:44 +0000
Re: parsability "Robin Vowels" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2015-02-09 00:48 +1100
Re: parsability Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2015-02-08 20:49 +0100
Re: parsability news@iecc.com (News Subsystem) - 2015-02-09 14:37 +1100
Re: Choosing a parser for Mathematica input Robert Jacobson <rljacobson@gmail.com> - 2015-02-06 19:04 -0800
csiph-web