Re: Jensen's device (Mike McCarty)
3 Apr 1998 17:05:42 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[4 earlier articles]
Re: Jensen's device (JørgenSteensgaard) (1998-03-24)
Re: Jensen's device (1998-03-30)
Re: Jensen's device (1998-03-30)
Re: Jensen's device (1998-03-30)
Re: Jensen's device (Uday S. Reddy) (1998-03-30)
Re: Jensen's device (Dr A. N. Walker) (1998-04-03)
Re: Jensen's device (1998-04-03)
Re: Jensen's device (Dr Richard A. O'Keefe) (1998-04-03)
Re: Jensen's device (1998-04-03)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: (Mike McCarty)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 3 Apr 1998 17:05:42 -0500
Organization: DSC Communications Corporation
References: 98-03-193 98-03-259
Keywords: algol60, history


)The simplicity of call-by-name is still a reality. The theory of
)call-by-value (and call-by-reference) lags behind that of call-by-name
)by decades and, even when the theories are discovered, we find that
)they are a lot more complicated than the corresponding theories for
)call-by-name. Thus, call-by-name lives, at least in theory if not in
)real languages.


You seem to be trying to support call by name. Are you aware that it has
been proven that no routine to swap its arguments can be written using
call by name? I.E. in C one could write

void Swap(int *Arg1,int *Arg2) {
int Temp;

Temp = *Arg1;
*Arg1 = *Arg2;
*Arg2 = Temp;

But this is not possible using call by name.


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.