Kaz Kylheku <kkylh...@gmail.com> writes:Agreed (except that I think you meant relational operators, not
> On 2009-12-01, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
>> If the language required "<" and ">" to work consistently for pointer
>> values (i.e., for any two valid pointers p1 and p2, exactly one of
>> (p1 < p2), (p1 == p2), and (p1 > p2) is true, along with the other
>> usual consistency requirements), then the "<" and ">" operators
>> *would* have to do all that work.
> Which means that code targetting 8086 machines would be larger and slower,
> When C was standarized, this architecture was widespread, and used
> This issue is now worth revisiting.
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.