Re: ["Can I ", sprintf ("make this code work?\n")]

[William Poetra Yoga Hadisoeseno]

On 5/30/06, Bill Denney <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2006, William Poetra Yoga Hadisoeseno wrote:
> > On 5/30/06, Keith Goodman <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> On 5/29/06, Etienne Grossmann <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>
> >>> this is just to ask whether there is a 2.9.5 setting that would allow me to
> >>> run this (legacy) code unchanged?
> >>>
> >>>     ["Can I ", sprintf ("make this code work?\n")]
> >>
> >> The parser thinks you are trying to concatenate three things. Just
> >> remove the space between sprintf and (.
> > So, is this a bug or a feature?
>
> It's the best of both worlds: both.
>
> The longer answer (that I think is right) is:
>
> When Octave's parser reaches something like
>
> ["Can I ", sprintf ("make this code work?\n")]
>
> It parses it as
>
> a concatenation: [
> an interpreted string: "Can I "
> a separator: ,
> a function or variable: sprintf
> a grouping or function argument opening: (
> an interpreted string: "make this code work?\n"
> a group or function argument closing: )
> a concatenation closing: ]
>
> The problem is that it doesn't know if sprintf is a function or a variable
> here, and as such, it can't be sure if the grouping after it is just a
> grouping or if it is the argument to the function.  Removing the space
> after sprintf removes the doubt.

Oh well, since the general convention (IMO) for Octave code is "func
(arg1, arg2, ...)" with a space in between, is it better then to write
it like this instead:

["Can I ", (sprintf ("make this code work?\n"))]

?

> (Etienne, could something about this go into the FAQ)
>
> Bill
>
> --
> "We are accustomed to see men deride what they do not understand, and
> snarl at the good and beautiful because it lies beyond their sympathies."
>    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe


--
William Poetra Yoga Hadisoeseno