Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?"

"Tony Finch" <dot@dotat.at>
1 Dec 2002 22:44:10 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[52 earlier articles]
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" whopkins@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" peter_flass@yahoo.com (Peter Flass) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" fjh@students.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" thp@cs.ucr.edu (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" sander@haldjas.folklore.ee (Sander Vesik) (2002-12-01)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" fjh@students.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) (2002-12-03)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) (2002-12-03)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-12-03)
Re: Pointers to "why C behaves like that ?" vugluskr@unicorn.math.spbu.ru (Roman Shaposhnick) (2002-12-07)
[9 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Tony Finch" <dot@dotat.at>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 1 Dec 2002 22:44:10 -0500
Organization: dotat labs
References: 02-11-095 02-11-128 02-11-150 02-11-152
Keywords: types
Posted-Date: 01 Dec 2002 22:44:09 EST

"jacob navia" <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote:
>"Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> "a" is of type ANY, or Object, or Equ, or whatever happens to be the
>> most general type that allows comparisons for equality. Type inference
>> will not produce a more specific definition of "a" or "b" at this
>> point. Actually that's OK - there's no need to actually nail the type
>> down at this point.
>
>Of course not, it will be done at run time by the run time assignment
>operator.


Hindley-Milner typing (as used by ML etc.) doesn't require any run-time
type information.


>Yes but those unions must be disambiguated at run time. There is no free
>lunch.


C programs that use unions will have manually-coded (error-prone!)
disambiguation.


Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/


Post a followup to this message

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