dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) (01/12/88)
Enough already! If you have problems with == versus =, try #define EQ == This is quite obvious and not likely to confuse either the novice or experienced programmer (like macros for IF, ENDIF, et cetera might). Suffer through pow(x,y) notation, it's not *that* bad. We've had to type strcpy(s,t), strcmp(s,t), strcat(s,t), et cetera, for years. Besides, there are real problems with defining new operators, particularly for exponentiation. Forget a logical exclusive-or operator. (Really, how often would you use one?) Sure, we should keep these in mind for D, but let's not bog down the C standardization process. They just ain't C. The opinions expressed above are mine.
jamesa%betelgeuse@Sun.COM (James D. Allen) (01/13/88)
In article <11225@brl-adm.ARPA>, dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) writes: > Enough already! > > #define EQ == > Suffer through pow(x,y) notation... > Forget a logical exclusive-or operator.... A voice in the wilderness! Mr. Sill deserves to graduate to a newsgroup with a higher signal-to-noise ratio. (The smart Las Vegas money, however, is still betting on at least 10 more postings on each "topic".)
gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) (01/13/88)
In article <11225@brl-adm.ARPA> dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) writes: >Suffer through pow(x,y) notation, it's not *that* bad. True, but having the operation done by log & exp with doubles when much more efficient methods could have been used, *is* bad. >Besides, there are real problems with defining new operators, That's for sure. There aren't many symbols left!