On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 03:46:20PM -0400, Dave Tweed wrote:
> Byron Jeff wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 01:19:18PM -0400, Dave Tweed wrote:
> > > Byron Jeff wrote:
> > > > I remember the separator/terminator difference from Pascal. Used to=
 drive
> > > > me nuts. Reason is the inconsistency. Terminators, while annoying, =
are
> > > > consistent.
> > >=20
> > > Technically, the semicolon is a statement *seaparator* in C, too.
> >=20
> > Nope. This is not correct. You can see the difference when you have one
> > statement in a block and more that one.
>=20
> Yes, it is correct.

Dave, trust me that it's not.

>=20
> > In C (one statement):
> >=20
> > if (test)
> >    i =3D 1;
>=20
> Which could also be written:
>=20
>   if (test) i =3D 1;

The newline is not relevant. It's precisely why the semicolon is required.

>=20
> > In C (more than one statement):
> >=20
> > if (test) {
> >    i =3D 1;
> >    j =3D 2;
> > }
>=20
> Which could also be written:
>=20
>   if (test) {
>      i =3D 1;
>      j =3D 2
>   }

It cannot. This program:


main()
{
   int i,j;

   if (1) {
      i =3D 1;
      j =3D 2
   }
}

Generates these error:


testme.c: In function main:
testme.c:8:4: error: expected ; before } token
make: *** [testme] Error 1

>=20
> or even:
>=20
>   if (test) { i =3D 1; j =3D 2 }

Again this will fail with an error. It would be valid if coded in Pascal.

>=20
> All of this is possible becuase ';' is a separator, not a terminator.

It is not. Sorry to break the news to you.

>=20
> In your example, the compound statement (inside the braces) has three
> statments, the third of which is null. In both of my examples, it has
> just two statements.

As I said in my other post, there is no null statement in my example.

>=20
> Of course, we all write compound statements in the style of your example,
> and we don't need to worry about adding or removing that last semicolon
> specifically because C allows null statements.

Null statements have nothing to do with this.

The compiler backs me up on this.

>=20
> End-of-line has no significance whatsoever in the syntax of C. It's just
> whitespace. However, EOL *is* significant in preprocessor statements and
> in C++ style '//' comments.
>=20

Not relevant to the discussion as the preprocessor is not a part of the
language specification proper.

BAJ

> -- Dave Tweed
> --=20
> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--=20
Byron A. Jeff
Chair: Department of Computer Science and Information Technology
College of Information and Mathematical Sciences
Clayton State University
http://faculty.clayton.edu/bjeff
--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.