Re: grammar triviality with '&&'

[Ray Andrews <rayandrews@eastlink.ca>]

On 03/06/2015 12:23 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> Did you forget that every C syntactic construct has an explicit
> terminating symbol (semicolon, brace, parenthesis, quotation mark,
> etc.)?

No, that's exactly my point.  But as Bart just explained, since newlines 
are syntactic in
interactive mode (how could it really be otherwise?) They must be 
syntactic in scripts,
and that is the heart of the matter.  It looks like what I've been 
'asking for' is just to
permit a sloppy parse of lines beginning with '&&'--a default value--but 
who really
needs that? Better to be explicit.  I repent of it.

 >These "convoluted" bits would appear much less so if you did not 
insist on forcing your understanding of other tools onto this one. vq
Not forcing, rather confessing why my internal parsing engine is so 
busted. Getting the C
out of me is turning out to be 10x harder than I expected.
Anyway, it's too much noise on the list.