David W. Tamkin wrote:
Terry Jones wrote,
| what i am claiming (and i'll use one of your example responses below
| to illustrate this) is that something like this:
|
| if ((A || B) && (C || D)){
| action;
| }
|
| is vastly easier for people to look at, vaguely understand, and build
| upon than your equivalent:
|
| :0
| * !A
| * !B
| { }
| :0E
| * !C
| * !D
| { }
| :0E
| action
If exposure to C or something similar has already made them familiar with
"&&" and "||" and "{ ... ;}" while total strangeness from procmail has kept
them from ever learning what ":0E" means, then yes.
Or exposure to awk, perl and a whole bunch of other languages!
I see exactly what the first means, but could never figure out the second
in a million years.
--
Peter Galbraith, research scientist
<galbraith(_at_)mixing(_dot_)qc(_dot_)dfo(_dot_)ca>
Maurice-Lamontagne Institute, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada
P.O. Box 1000, Mont-Joli Qc, G5H 3Z4 Canada 418-775-0852 - FAX 418-775-0546