 |
 |
-----Original Message----- From: Richard E Maine <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tuesday, 18 October 2005 1:06 >On Oct 17, 2005, at 1:07 AM, O'Brien Paddy wrote: > >> The repeat factor which is available in DATA statements is not >> available in array constructors... >> Is there a particular reason that the repeat factor has been excluded? > >The syntax of DATA statements is generally quite quirky. It is >completely different from the syntax of anything else and, in general, >doesn't work out well in other contexts. That is one reason that I >generally avoid DATA statements, but on occasion there are things that >just turn out to be difficult to do any other way. > >The repeat factor is one cause of some of the oddities in DATA >statement syntax. Consider something like > > 6*7 > >In any context other than a DATA statement, that means 6 times 7. The >DATA statement does not allow arithmetic, even the most trivial cases >like that. Pretty much every other context does allow arithmetic and >thus, repeat factors wouldn't work. Certainly 6*7 is a perfectly valid >value for an array constructor element, for example. One could perhaps >start defining a lot of special-case rules for when 6*7 meant >multiplication and when it meant repeats, but that would get very >complicated very fast - I can't imagine that being a good road to go >down. (6)7 might work well as a repeat factor that avoids the use of *.