Re: on allowing "int a" definition everywhere

Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>

On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:48:17 +0200, fir wrote:
>

got some thought today thet simply probably allowing to define "int a"
everywhere could be just simply a good c (or other language) design
decision

>
Somehow along the line from BCPL to B to C, one useful feature was lost:
the ability to have a value-returning statement block inside an
expression.

>
It was lost in the BCPL to B transition.

Interestingly, it's an old idea the existed in both of C's main
progenitors, and yet is still got lost.

BCPL was influenced by CPL, so BCPL's valof/resultis expression is
similar to CPL's result of {... result := ...} form.  But Ritchie also
cites Algol 68 as an influence on C, and in Algol 68 /all/ blocks have a
value (but the type is sometimes void).

Thompson must have thought it not worth preserving in B, and no one
thought to put it back into C when thinking about Algol 68.

--
Ben.