|keywords and identifiers.. email@example.com (1999-09-11)|
|Re: keywords and identifiers.. firstname.lastname@example.org (1999-09-16)|
|Re: keywords and identifiers.. email@example.com (Chris F Clark) (1999-09-16)|
|Re: keywords and identifiers.. firstname.lastname@example.org (Armel) (1999-09-16)|
|Re: keywords and identifiers.. email@example.com (Jerry Leichter) (1999-09-20)|
|Re: keywords and identifiers.. firstname.lastname@example.org (1999-09-24)|
|Re: keywords and identifiers.. email@example.com (Leif Leonhardy) (1999-09-27)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Gene Wirchenko)|
|Date:||24 Sep 1999 22:52:21 -0400|
|Organization:||Okanagan Internet Junction|
|References:||99-09-045 99-09-054 99-09-077|
Jerry Leichter <email@example.com> wrote:
>| > Are there languages which allow a keyword to be
>| >accepted as an identifier.
>| Yes, most of the old (incomprehensible) languages did that (like PL/1
>| i think but i'm not sure, i'm not very used to obsolete languages)....
>Ah, so modern languages like C are "comprehensible"? Perhaps you should
>spend some time looking at the submissions to the Obfuscated C contests.
>Everyone loves to give PL/I examples like:
> IF IF = THEN THEN THEN = ELSE ELSE ELSE = END END
>[Actually IF IF = THEN THEN = ELSE; ELSE ELSE = END; END -John]
Well, no. PL/I does have a THEN in its THEN clause, so
IF IF = THEN THEN THEN = ELSE; ELSE ELSE = END; END;
Insertions: ^^^^ ^
[Oops, you're right -John]
>(which I think is valid PL/I - it's been years, but it's at least close)
It has been years for me, too, and they're far away years, too.
They can stay that way.
>but that simply proves that you *can* write incomprehensible code in
>PL/I. So? Show me a language in which you *can't* write incomprehen-
No such critter, but there are some spectacular examples at the
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.