Let me try to say it again in another way:
the (sometimes considered destructive) power of the expressions a++ and ++a
comes from the fact, that these expressions are EXPRESSIONs and can be used
in other expressions or assignments as side effects, for example:
x = a++;
or
*t++ = *s++;
Now, if you don't want such "destructive power" in your language,
you have to define these constructs in a way, that they are not
expressions,
that is, that they have no value. But then they are simple shortcuts for
other syntax we already have, for example:
a++;
as a replacement for
a += 1;
and I think, the PL/1 designers didn't want that "destructive power"
outlined
above, and so they didn't see a reason for allowing a++; and ++a;
Kind regards
Bernd
I'm naive. What's a good reason (other than economy of language design)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
