Re: Are pragmas always "instructions"? (was: Re: What is a pragma?)

> Since pragmas may be defined using declarative semantics, as well as
> with imperative semantics, the word "instructions" makes me nervous;

Okay, I can understand that, although I’m not sure I agree (more below).

> saying that pragmas convey information (and in particular information
> not conveyed by the standard semantics of ixml, or not conveyed in the
> same way) seems more general, and is intended to cover both declarative
> and imperative semantics (and anything else).

For my money, it’s much *too* general. Comments also convey information, for example.

Firstly, I wonder whether we can help you make peace with “instructions”? I have two ways of looking at it that may or may not help:

a) An instruction needn’t be simply a command. Think of assembly instructions for some furniture: it’s totally reasonable to see items of the type “The square peg goes into the square hole”, or “You should have 12 long bolts and 6 short bolts”. They’re declaratives, not imperatives, but I don’t think that means they’re not properly instructions. 

b) Pragmas instruct the processor. They either instruct it “to…” or instruct it “that…”. The former is imperative; the latter, declarative.

Secondly, if “instructions” still doesn’t work for you, how about “directives” or “directions”?

Very best,

BTW

Received on Saturday, 29 January 2022 10:12:17 UTC