On 2002-01-20 00:20, Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom> wrote:
> In article <3c4a05f7@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> 
> wrote:
> 
>>   Because it would disallow making automatic generation of long lists of
>> items (number, vectors...) in such a simple and versatile way as currently.
>>   Currently it's just enough to create the list of items in a loop, without
>> having to take into account that there should be one comma less than the
>> number of items.
>>   (Note that the problem with the solution you suggested is that there might
>> be cases where the loop is not executed even once, that is, no items are
>> created at all.)
> 
> In this case it's an extra line and some math in the loop. The cases you 
> mention aren't that common, and you can still put a comma on every line 
> but the last, it's just a little more complex.

You could also allow a superfluous comma after the last item, like many
other programming languages (e.g., C and perl) do.

	hp

-- 

|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR       | Verstand, die Augen haben und nicht sehen,

__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |    -- Jeremia 5:21

Post a reply to this message