[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Date Index Thread Index Search archive:
Date:Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:23:20 +0000 (UTC) 
Subject:Re: re-sending message about comments 
From:jlc1 
Volume-ID: 

I encountered this problem (actually a related problem,
not this specific one) while writing some syntax
colouring code for use in ved, a couple of years ago.
IIRC it was actually a bug(?) in ved, but for a similar
reason.

I don't remember if I reported it as a bug, or e-mailed
anyone about it.

But it's an example of why poplog needs a bug-tracker,
perhaps by using the bug-tracking mechanism on the
sourceforge Openpoplog site. I'm sure I would have
reported it, if the poplog community had (and used)
an agreed official bug-reporting mechanism.

There are not so many bugs that it would be a huge
amount of effort to maintain.

As for your specific question, my answer is: I don't know.

(As an aside, I tend not to use nested comments in my
code, either in C++ or pop11 or whatever, anymore,
I tend to stick to the EOL style of commenting.
ENTER gsr/@a/;;; / is actually less effort than inserting
a /* ... */ pair and makes the comment stand out better.

How many times to you see big comments enclosed in a box
of asterisks, to make them stand out? In C++ the #ifdef
mechanism is useful for hiding blocks of code, and is
better than using comment brackets for that purpose;
there is a similar mechanism in pop11.

Jonathan

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Aaron Sloman" <A.Sloman@cs.bham.ac.uk>
To: <poplog-dev@cs.bham.ac.uk>
Sent: 16 January 2005 13:47
Subject: re-sending message about comments


> I gave the wrong address in the Cc line.
> 
> >From Aaron Sloman Sun Jan 16 13:45:05 GMT 2005
> To: pop-forum@cs.bham.ac.uk
> Subject: Should this mishap?
> Cc: pop-dev@cs.bham.ac.uk
> 
> I have just wasted about an hour because things like this produce
> an error (except that the example occurred in a very long file).
> 
>     /*
>     '/foo/*.p'
>     */
> 
>     ;;; MISHAP UNTERMINATED "/*" COMMENT
> 
> I.e. the itemiser does not, at present, treat the second
> occurrence of '/*' as occurring inside a string. So it is
> treated as starting an embedded comment.
> 
> The following does not mishap!!
> 
>     /*
>     '/foo/*.p'   ;;; */
>     */
> 
> My first reaction was that this is a bug in the itemiser, since
> comments should be able to include arbitrary legal pop11 code.
> 
> I guess this has been the behaviour since about 25 years ago.
> 
> Should it be changed?
> 
> The counter-argument is that comments should be allowed to contain
> apostrophes, e.g.
> 
> /* this shouldn't mishap (unterminated string) and it does not */
> 
> Changing it would require digging into some very hairy code for the
> lexical analyser in
> 
> $popsrc/item.p
> 
> But perhaps too many comments with apostrophes would start causing
> errors if it were changed.
> 
> Maybe the above error message could be changed to include a hint.
> 
> Aaron
> 
>