329

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

121 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Made with KolourPaint and screenshots from Kate (with the GitHub theme).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] sus@programming.dev 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

So I think it's still probably unclear to people why "mix of keywords and identifiers" is bad: it means any new keyword could break backwards compatibility because someone could have already named a type the same thing as that new keyword.

This syntax puts type identifiers in the very prominent position of "generic fresh statement after semicolon or newline"

..though I've spent like 10 minutes thinking about this and now it's again not making sense to me. Isn't the very common plain "already_existing_variable = 5" also causing the same problem? We'd have to go back to cobol style "SET foo = 5" for everything to actually make it not an issue

[-] AnotherPenguin@programming.dev 3 points 2 days ago

At least in C#, you can define variables with keyword names like this:

var @struct = "abc"

I think in Kotlin you can do the same, and even include spaces with backticks like val abstract class = "abc"

I'm not sure if other languages allow that, regardless it should be rarely used.

[-] pivot_root@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Swift also uses backticks and Rust has a dumb one in the form of r#thekeyword. Still much better than introducing a async as a new keyword in a minor version of a language and breaking a bunch of libraries.