[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: New long comments in 5.1
- From: Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@...>
- Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 09:08:18 +0200
Doug Rogers wrote:
Just not the latter, */.
What about the following C++ code?
a = b *//this is a one-line comment
Touche! That *could*// happen in real code.
Whatever the Lua management decides is fine by me. I'm like the others. I
think something simple and easy is best, even if it means that under extreme
conditions it won't work. I just want it to work properly in common cases. To
me, ']]' is common enough to warrant concern.
Nesting isn't such a big issue for me. We each have our own tastes.
Neither for me. If I verbalized some concerns about syntax-highlighting
being more difficult (but far, far from the complexity of the Perl
lexer...), obviouly it wasn't to influence design choice (that's what I
tried to mean by the clumsy sentence "this concern isn't the problem of
Lua authors"). Whatever the final choice, we will adapt.
Just one thought:
Block comments and literal strings are mostly meant for enclose large
number of lines (less for literal strings that are useful, amongst other
strings, to enclose Dos paths). At least, that's where there is the most
likely potential problems.
Literal srings have already some conventions, like if they start by a
new line, it is not enclosed in the string.
Why not make another convention, like starting (some) multiline block
comments (literal strings) with --[[[ ([[[) anywhere in a line and
ending them with ]]] (or --]]] as it is convenient) only at the start of
line, a bit like the Perl/PHP HereDoc?
It lifts a lot of potential problems, as we rarely find code like:
val = t[a[f[i
]]] * 2;
It is simple (no need to check content to know how many starts to put,
compatible with old syntax (unlike some proposals seen here), nicely
consistent, and quite idiot proof.
What do you think? Any booby trap?
Philippe Lhoste (Paris -- France)
Professional programmer and amateur artist