Possible change to gen* for splits

[Richard Henderson]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 11:34:21AM -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
>     Actually, since I can do lookahead, how about:
> 
> 	"condition"
> 
> 	"&& reload_completed"
> 
> I guess that works since it would be meaningless were there not a
> previous condition, but it seems sort of "odd" to me, though I can't say
> exactly why.

I quite like it.

> My concern is in picking a syntax where it's obvious the
> is some relation between the two conditions to somebody who might not
> have carefully poured through all the documentation.

Exactly.  Which is why I like a leading && so much.  Pick
any other marker and it's going to be meaningless unless
you've read all the documentation.  Use && and you're at
least using the right C operator to describe what happens.


r~