Subject: RE: Two "Philisophical" questions about the language
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 15:31:02 -0000
|
> To those questions I would add another one:
> why "if" xpath 2.0 expression demands "else" part?
>
> IfExpr ::= "if" "(" Expr ")" "then" ExprSingle "else"
> ExprSingle
The main reason was to avoid the infamous dangling-else ambiguity:
if (c) then if (d) then e else f
I personally would have preferred the solution of a closing token such as
"end-if" or "fi".
I do remember a half-day spent on if/then/else, where it was clear that
no-one much liked the status-quo syntax, but no-one could come up with
improvements that had majority support.
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
|