Re: dead code or otherwise, was Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linux?

George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net>
Fri, 09 Sep 2016 14:02:16 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linux? 221-501-9011@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2016-09-06)
Re: Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linux? bc@freeuk.com (BartC) (2016-09-06)
Re: dead code or otherwise, was Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linu gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2016-09-08)
Re: dead code or otherwise, was Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linu 221-501-9011@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2016-09-08)
Re: dead code or otherwise, was Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linu gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2016-09-09)
Re: dead code or otherwise, was Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linu 221-501-9011@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2016-09-09)
Re: dead code or otherwise, was Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linu gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2016-09-09)
Re: dead code or otherwise, was Alternative C compilers on x86_64 Linu 221-501-9011@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2016-09-09)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 14:02:16 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
References: 16-09-001 16-09-005 16-09-009 16-09-012 16-09-015 16-09-016 16-09-017 16-09-018
Injection-Info: miucha.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="71793"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: C, Lisp, comment
Posted-Date: 09 Sep 2016 14:53:23 EDT

On Fri, 9 Sep 2016 06:05:44 +0000 (UTC), Kaz Kylheku
<221-501-9011@kylheku.com> wrote:


>On 2016-09-09, George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> wrote:
>> But like any good Usenet discussion, it (d)evolved into something more
>> general.
>>
>> Not every language with a CASE like construct has C's limitations on
>> specifying the alternatives. Lisp certainly doesn't.
>
>Yes, it does, in fact. The labels in Lisp case are literals that are
>embedded in the CASE syntax itself, and not evaluated. They are
>compared to the input value using EQL equality. Duplicate cases
>are a bug, which is not required to be diagnosed.


Lisp does not restrict CASE "labels" to integers like C. They can be
any of [at least] symbols, characters, integers or booleans.


And unlike C where booleans and characters are subsets of integer, in
Lisp they are discrete types. Additionally symbols are a reference
type - a pointer to a structure.


So no! Lisp does not have C's limitations.


George
[Lisp does restrict case labels to literals, so if two of them
are the same, that's a bug. -John]

Post a followup to this message

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