|Compiling pointer arithmetic targeting JVM firstname.lastname@example.org (2003-11-21)|
|Re: Compiling pointer arithmetic targeting JVM email@example.com (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2003-12-03)|
|Re: Compiling pointer arithmetic targeting JVM firstname.lastname@example.org (2003-12-03)|
|Re: Compiling pointer arithmetic targeting JVM email@example.com (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-12-08)|
|Re: Compiling pointer arithmetic targeting JVM firstname.lastname@example.org (Fergus Henderson) (2003-12-13)|
|From:||Fergus Henderson <email@example.com>|
|Date:||13 Dec 2003 20:57:37 -0500|
|References:||03-11-098 03-12-014 03-12-059|
|Keywords:||Java, code, comment|
|Posted-Date:||13 Dec 2003 20:57:37 EST|
Joachim Durchholz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>> Equality comparisons check both the Object reference and offset,
>> inequalities, at least in C, only need to compare the offset.
I think you have just misunderstood glen herrmannsfeldt's terminology.
By "inequalities", glen herrmannsfeldt no doubt meant the C operators
">", ">=", "<" and "<=", which correspond to those operators in
mathematics that are often known by mathematicians as "inequalities",
not the C "!=" operator. His terminology was admittedly confusing.
It would have been much clearer to follow the terminology used in the
C standard and to therefore describe these operators as "relational"
operators. But nevertheless what he said was correct, presuming you
interpret "inequalities" in the mathematical sense.
Fergus Henderson <email@example.com> | "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne | of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
[It's correct if you're using the conventions for x86 large model segmented
code. But I hope it's gone for good. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.