[Oberon] Re (2): LONGINT, RETURN & etc.
lab.eas at gmail.com
Sat Jul 1 01:45:04 CEST 2017
We are going back to the 1960's.
Structured programming was fully discussed/analysed then ......
all about GOTOs ....
OTOH "is more understandable" is most important, but apparently very subjective.
I must continually ask myself why nobody uses ETHO's superb TUI-interface,
and even less wily [under Linux] copied from ETHO [apparently copied
from PARC ?].
On 6/17/17, Chris Burrows <chris at cfbsoftware.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Oberon [mailto:oberon-bounces at lists.inf.ethz.ch] On Behalf Of
>> peter at easthope.ca
>> Sent: Sunday, 18 June 2017 1:02 AM
>> To: oberon at lists.inf.ethz.ch
>> Subject: [Oberon] Re (2): LONGINT, RETURN & etc.
>> From: Chris Burrows <chris at cfbsoftware.com>
>> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:55:16 +0930
>> > http://www.astrobe.com/OberonSyntax/html/OberonSyntax.htm
>> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:40:15 +0930
>> > What you can't have is just RETURN without an expression.
>> According to your diagrams an expression can be factor and a factor
>> can be NIL or " ". So "RETURN END" is OK. Interesting edge case!
> NIL is a reserved word representing a null POINTER, " " is a blank CHAR.
> They do not denote that 'expression' is optional.
> RETURN NIL END is valid
> RETURN " " END is valid
> RETURN END is not valid
> If expressions were optional then statements like
> IF THEN DoSomething END;
> FOR i := TO BY DO DoSomething END;
> would also be syntactically correct!
> Chris Burrows
> CFB Software
> Oberon at lists.inf.ethz.ch mailing list for ETH Oberon and related systems
More information about the Oberon