C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: Optional Semicolons

From: Jason McKesson <jmckesson_at_[hidden]>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 17:13:30 -0400
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 1:54 PM William Linkmeyer via Std-Discussion
<std-discussion_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> In a vacuum I would agree with you. But consider that:
> 1. This feature would not be mandatory on the programmer

Every programmer would have to be *able* to read it. So it is
mandatory, even if you don't want to use it.

> 2. This may be helpful to the ease of development

Not materially. Do you have any evidence that:

A: Statement terminators make languages harder to use in any significant way?

B: Removing statement terminators from a language that already has
them will make it significantly easier to use?

> 3. I’m going out on a limb here, but I think many of us can agree that the semicolon is often “mentally elided” when reading C++

... so?

> Also consider that C++ gives the programmer plenty of ways to be expressive already [1]. This is in-line with the programmer’s ability to be expressive.
> [1]: a function-like object in C++ could look like a class with an overloaded (), a std::function, a lambda, a regular function, some inline assembly with scope, a function pointer (smart or otherwise), etc.

Each one of which has both objective and subjective advantages and
disadvantages in particular circumstances.

Received on 2022-04-28 21:14:22