[OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++?

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.help
Subject	[OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++?
Date	Thu, 19 May 2011 08:03:28 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	20
Message-ID	<ir30ui$jok$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<8762p7upgn.fsf@merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRILUCA> <4t6Bp.534$pi2.511@newsfe11.iad>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
Injection-Date	Thu, 19 May 2011 12:03:30 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info	mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="BrOwaJANne849xlH+KPYjQ"; logging-data="20244"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18npoi1kxgCj+6jtZBTsRlT"
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
In-Reply-To	<4t6Bp.534$pi2.511@newsfe11.iad>
Cancel-Lock	sha1:0DiXUADFdORU7B0wZKT5to00Rxc=
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.help:695

Show key headers only | View raw

On 5/19/2011 6:40 AM, David Lamb wrote:
> [...]
> I think ++ exists only because the hardware on which C was developed had
> an addressing mode that did it atomically in the very special case of
> referring to
> something = array[index++];

     FWIW, some guy named Dennis Ritchie says this is not true.

	"People often guess that [++ and --]were created to use the
	auto-increment and auto-decrement address modes provided
	by the DEC PDP-11 on which C and Unix first became popular.
	This is historically impossible, since there was no PDP-11
	when B was developed."

"B" is the language from which C inherited ++ and --, and much else.

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid

Back to comp.lang.java.help | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-05-19 09:19 +0200
  Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Bent C Dalager <bcd@pvv.ntnu.no> - 2011-05-19 10:22 +0000
  Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-05-19 06:40 -0400
    Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-19 07:58 -0400
    [OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-05-19 08:03 -0400
      Re: [OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-19 07:35 -0700
        Re: [OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-05-19 22:57 -0400
          Re: [OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2011-05-20 11:00 +0100
          Re: [OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-20 12:55 -0700
      Re: [OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-05-19 17:58 -0400
        Re: [OT] Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-05-19 23:13 -0400
    Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-19 08:43 -0400
  Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-05-19 07:51 -0400
  Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-19 08:03 -0400
    Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-19 08:08 -0400
  Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-05-19 10:23 -0700
    Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Merciadri Luca <Luca.Merciadri@student.ulg.ac.be> - 2011-05-19 21:15 +0200
      Re: Why would one use += 1 at the place of ++? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-19 15:29 -0400

csiph-web