On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 08:38:38 +0100, Bernd Oppolzer wrote: > >>> PL/1 today also allows simple pointer arithmetic, and even with a C-like >>> syntax (if you want): >>> >>> DCL P PTR; >>> >>> P = ADDR (X); >>> P += 5; >>> >>> /* now P contains the ADDR of X plus 5 */ >>> >>> but unlike C, pointers in PL/1 have no type, so in this case, you get simple >>> address arithmetic. >>> >> I shall scarcely be surprised if an ardent PL/I partisan on this list touts >> that >> as a merit of PL/I. >> ... > >It was the decision of the PL/1 language designers to make >the language more user friendly to the C community. You don't have to >use such language elements, if you don't like it. I see it this way: >PL/1 is such a powerful language, that it even allows different >programming styles. Or: why not allow language constructs, as long >as it is clear to the programmer, what the new language element does >and as long as the spirit of the language is not broken? > Are you saying that as an accommodation to C programmers PL/I has recently provided pointers with types, with increments by element size?
>BTW: variable ++; is not still possible in PL/1 for several good reasons. > I'm naive. What's a good reason (other than economy of language design) for not providing "variable ++"? (And what of "++ variable"?) One possibility might be lexical ambiguity. -- gill ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
