This one bit me today

[Austin Ziegler]

>>>>> On 23 Oct 89 20:59:25 GMT, goudreau at dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) said:
Bob> In article <273 at bbxsda.UUCP> scott at bbxsda.UUCP (Scott Amspoker) writes:
>Bob Goudreau writes:
>
>>  Such compilers are *broken*, at least as C compilers.
>
>I don't get it.  Are you saying that a C compiler that allows the option
>of nested comments is *broken*?  I believe Turbo C has a nested comments
>option.

Bob> Yes, please re-read my reply.  Any such language translator is *broken*
Bob> if it purports to be a translator of the C language, for the simple
Bob> reason that such a program violates translator behavior that is mandated
Bob> by all the important definitions of the C language (K&R, ANSI).

   I read the rest of your article, but this is the one part I have
problems with.  I am originally a Pascal programmer, and have been
programming in C for enough time to acquaint myself with the language.  In
Pascal, one of the nicest features for debugging is nested comments.  This
is provided as a *Debugging* feature *only* in Turbo C.  Nowhere does
Borland state that you should use that feature in normal programming.  As a
rule, I do not use nested comments in C, but I *have* found the need to
comment it out because I am not fully acquainted with all of the features
of the preprocessor commands.  I do not think that a compiler which
supports Nested Comments (in either command-line or integrated debugging
modes) is *broken* at all.  Much of Borland's C market exists from their
Pascal programmers, and yes, it is hard to break old habits (be they good
or bad).  I think that this is a valid *option* but I agree with you, Bob,
that it should not be the Standard.

	  Elminster, the Sage of Shadowdale (austin at bucsf.bu.edu)
	       700 Commonwealth Box 2094, Boston, MA  02215
				     
		  I am *NOT* a C guru, I just try to be.
		 I *AM* a Pascal guru, when I want to be.