Where should the type information be 149
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:38:39 -0700, Steve
What do you mean by "seemingly senseless"? Right-shifting a signed value is about the only undefined integer operation that I know of, and hardly anyone takes that restriction seriously, because essentially all compilers do the right (sensible) thing. Speaking of which: does anyone know of a C compiler-machine that actually does something other than an arithmetic (signed) right shift in this case?
If you pretend that C has a type that it doesn't, then who knows what you're imagining that the compiler will do.
Nonsense. All of the logical operators are well defined.
Examples? I don't believe you.
Why not use the language as specified, because that's what it's meant for?
You can't "cast" an integer result to a boolean, because there is no boolean. Well, you can add a redundant "!= 0", and some people do, but it makes no odds to the compiler, and no difference to most competent C programmers. In fact, I'd expect many to be annoyed by it.
No, good programmers hardly ever need casts, because their functions and expressions are correctly typed in the first place.
What change?
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:29:24 -0800, Michel Hack Yeah. He was right, and indeed most (good) buttemblers have similar boolean types. I misspoke. I meant to refer...
-- Andrew
Where should the type information be 150
Alt Folklore Computers from Newsgroups