From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <8cdad86de9428072d82f8764a903f798@vitanuova.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] multiple inputs
From: rog@vitanuova.com
In-Reply-To: <406C42A4.8000607@swtch.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu,  1 Apr 2004 18:36:36 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4cbd706e-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> which is much clearer and doesn't require us to wade through
> custom macro syntax.

i sympathise completely.

problem is the moment you have something that's flexible enough
to allow alt, you'll get someone that wants to do all kinds of other
things with it. remember:

LOCAL TREPTR	list(flg)
{
	REG TREPTR	r;
	REG INT		b;

	r = term(flg);
	WHILE r ANDF ((b=(wdval==ANDFSYM)) ORF wdval==ORFSYM)
	DO	r = makelist((b ? TAND : TORF), r, term(NLFLG));
	OD
	return(r);
}

what you're after, i think, is a different language, one with one or
two extra features, not really a way to customise C in an arbitrary
way.  a pre-processor could do the job, but you'd pay the price.

if many people defined syntax like the alt stuff, you'd really struggle
to work out what was going on. IMHO a language requires a small,
coherently designed set of features, not a way to add every feature
under the sun.