Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In computer science, syntactic sugar is syntax within a programming language that is designed to make things easier to read or to express. It makes the language "sweeter" for human use: things can be expressed more clearly, more concisely, or in an alternative style that some may prefer.
Operator overloading is syntactic sugar, and is used because it allows programming using notation nearer to the target domain [1] and allows user-defined types a similar level of syntactic support as types built into a language. It is common, for example, in scientific computing, where it allows computing representations of mathematical objects ...
In this example, it's used for instantiating the OUT class, which is the class for the standard output. The + operator has been overloaded by the class to append the string passed as argument to the stream. Operators such as + are syntactic sugar for conventionally named method calls: a + b stands for a.plus(b). The usual arithmetic precedence ...
In the example above, if the discount is 10%, then the first if statement will be evaluated as true and "you have to pay $30" will be printed out. All other statements below that first if statement will be skipped. The elseif statement, in the Ada language for example, is simply syntactic sugar for else followed by if.
List comprehension is a syntactic construct available in some programming languages for creating a list based on existing lists. It follows the form of the mathematical set-builder notation (set comprehension) as distinct from the use of map and filter functions.
Method chaining is a common syntax for invoking multiple method calls in object-oriented programming languages. Each method returns an object, allowing the calls to be chained together in a single statement without requiring variables to store the intermediate results.
p. q is syntactic sugar for p ["q"]. function p. q is syntactic sugar for p ["q"] = function. function builds a function. It doesn't declare it. Functions are first-class objects and can be assigned to variables, placed in tables, serialized into strings, and deserialized back out again. Think interpreted, not compiled.
The PAT syntax is similar, but not identical, to CSP M. [26] The principal differences between the PAT syntax and standard CSP M are the use of semicolons to terminate process expressions, the inclusion of syntactic sugar for variables and assignments, and the use of slightly different syntax for internal choice and parallel composition.