Uwe Mayer wrote: >> /* >> print(10); >> */ >> >> and >> >> ///* >> print(10); >> //*/ >> >> ? > > I think the *trick* here was that if you had larger blocks you'd only > have to change one side of the comment, i.e. the opening line, to > de-comment the block without searching the end of it and commenting > that out aswell.
Yes, but you can do that easily in C++ as well: /* print(10); //*/ Change to: //* print(10); //*/ I can't remember the exact pattern, but I remember using a similar trick in BCPL where at least there was the excuse of not otherwise having conditional compilation. C and C++ there is no excuse for such tricks. Google found Clive Feather's description of the BCPL trick at http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/clive-on-history.html: > I doubt it (though DMR may contradict me, of course). Every compiler > I remember using allowed both // and /* */ type comment delimiters. > Some also allowed | and \ to be used instead of /, so that || was also > a comment-to-end-of-line, and \* ... *\ was an alternate block comment > symbol. The latter was particularly useful, because it could be used > to comment out blocks of code that included /* ... */ comments (as > with C, comments do not nest). We used comments with vertical bars to > implement a variety of conditional compilation: > > |**||| IF > normal code > |*|||| ELSE > alternate code > |*|||| CANCEL ELSE > more normal code > |*|||| ELSE > more alternate code > |**||| ENDIF > > By default, this would compile the "normal code". To switch to the > "alternate code", the first line was changed to |**||* or |*|||| > instead. Because this comment symbol was used, the code could contain > normal comments and the "commenting-out" reverse comments I described > above. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
