Re: Definable operators

nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)
16 Apr 1997 00:18:17 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[10 earlier articles]
Re: Definable operators rivetchuck@aol.com (1997-04-02)
Re: Definable operators Dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1997-04-02)
Re: Definable operators burley@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) (1997-04-03)
Re: Definable operators rideau@ens.fr (Francois-Rene Rideau) (1997-04-03)
Re: Definable operators leichter@smarts.com (Jerry Leichter) (1997-04-06)
Re: Definable operators hrubin@stat.purdue.edu (1997-04-11)
Re: Definable operators nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (1997-04-16)
Re: Definable operators raw@math.wisc.edu (Matthew J. Raw) (1997-04-16)
Re: Definable operators dlester@cs.man.ac.uk (1997-04-16)
Re: Definable operators fanf@lspace.org (Tony Finch) (1997-04-18)
Re: Definable operators monnier+/news/comp/compilers@tequila.cs.yale.edu (Stefan Monnier) (1997-04-18)
Re: Definable operators burley@tweedledumb.cygnus.com (Craig Burley) (1997-04-18)
Re: Definable operators apardon@rc4.vub.ac.be (1997-04-20)
[21 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.lang.misc
Date: 16 Apr 1997 00:18:17 -0400
Organization: University of Cambridge, England
References: 97-03-037 97-04-018 97-04-034 97-04-061
Keywords: syntax, design

Herman Rubin <hrubin@stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>The claim that shifting is "not that common" is questionable. I have
>used it much more for other purposes than I have done other than
>simple formatted I/O, for which it is not needed.


I agree here, though shifting is strange in two senses. Most programs
don't need it at all but, those that do, tend to use it very heavily.
More seriously, the bit manipulation operations are typically the
subset used by a certain class of mathematicians, rather than
programmers. For example, one of the most common requirements is for
the basic operation "is every bit in A also set in B?" which has to be
coded very messily in most languages.


>This is one of the problems of language designers and compiler
>writers, and even for hardware designers. It is often quite easy to
>put something in at design time, and quite difficult to find a
>work-around later. It is quite easy to destroy common notation for
>computer purposes, and hard to get it back.


And conversely. Getting rid of misguided facilities is even harder.


Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG, England.
Email: nmm1@cam.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679
--


Post a followup to this message

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