W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: SPARQL 2004-10-12 syntax and grammar issues

From: Alberto Reggiori <alberto@asemantics.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:59:20 +0100
Message-Id: <2F4704F0-37B6-11D9-B40C-0011242E4018@asemantics.com>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
To: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>


On Nov 11, 2004, at 2:46 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/ 
>>>> 0210.html
>>>>
>>>> All three.  Or just # (c.f. common in scripting languages).
>>>
>>>
>>> +1 for just #
>>
>> If you are happy with that, I propose just "#" for comments.
>>
>> In the telecon I thought you were making the case for /**/ comments.

I think it was me at the time - I feel that multi-line comments  
(blocks) are useful as soon as your SPARQL queries gets several lines -  
and while debugging you might want to keep different query pieces  
visible. One more point is about documentation or "literate  
programming" ala javadoc, where one wants to provide some full blown  
description of what the query does. Using single line comments for  
everything might be annoying sometimes (yes, in Perl I hate single line  
comments sometimes)

to sum up:

+0 for /* ..... */ multi-line comments

+1 for # as single line comments


Alberto

>
> No, that may have been someone else. I'd like there to be one type,  
> but I
> dont really care which.
>
> My feeling is still that fewer syntax variations make the language  
> easier
> to learn.
>
> - Steve
>
-
Alberto Reggiori, Senior Partner, R&D @Semantics S.R.L.
alberto@asemantics.com  www.asemantics.com
Milan Office, milano@asemantics.com,   +39 0332 667092
Received on Tuesday, 16 November 2004 09:59:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:21 GMT