Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-12 09:16 -0800 |
| References | (1 earlier) <0c38ed73-a7b5-48cb-ad70-d537fa0d47ec@googlegroups.com> <5f8e824f-120d-4faa-a6d1-2868dd67083e@googlegroups.com> <n229cm$gcb$2@dont-email.me> <n22ea4$v7g$1@news.xmission.com> <79119d19-d4ea-47ad-ac22-1dfb7f089fbe@googlegroups.com> |
| Message-ID | <7252dbc5-151d-486a-a84d-e8ae59554097@googlegroups.com> (permalink) |
| Subject | Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 |
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 12:09:45 PM UTC-5, supe...@casperkitty.com wrote:
> On Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 10:21:38 AM UTC-6, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> > Has Rick ever claimed to be writing a C implementation? (I don't think so)
> >
> > He has made vague claims about his long term, long term goal being to make
> > his language (whatever he is calling it this week) to be C compatible, but
> > I doubt slavish devotion to the standards documents will ever be high on
> > his list of priorities.
>
> I would suggest that for Rick or anyone else who is considering writing a C-ish
> language, a good set of objectives would be:
>
> 1. Code which is valid in both languages should have the same meaning in
> both.
Mostly. CAlive extends a few things syntax-wise, but on the whole,
everything that I know how to program in C/C++ code will compile with
zero changes in CAlive, and it will function identically.
> 2. C code whose meaning would require interpreting things in a fashion
> contrary to the spirit of the new language should not compile, *but*
> should be readily modifiable to a form *which would have the same
> meaning in both*.
CAlive extends many things:
https://github.com/RickCHodgin/libsf/blob/master/books/rdc/rdc.odt
But, it will also work as a standard C compiler on most everything.
> Accepting those as starting principles will allow the new language to be
> take advantage of a large corpus of C code, without being bound by some of
> the peculiarities of C. For example, the C standard requires that given:
>
> uint32_t x=1; int32_t y=-1;
>
> compilers must accept the expression "x>y" and on machines where "int" is
> 32 bits it must yield 0. I would suggest that it would be better for a
> C-derived language to simply forbid that expression. A programmer wanting
> the behavior mandated by the C Standard could write the expression as
> "x > (uint32_t)y", and it could be argued that the expression *should* be
> written that way *even when writing in Standard C*; a programmer wanting the
> expression evaluated by the rules of mathematical integers (and not needing
> the code to be usable in C) could write the declaration as:
>
> unum32_t x=1; int32_t y=1;
>
> What do you think of that as a language philosophy?
CAlive will upsize signed and unsigned values to the next largest size
fundamental type in order to compare them. To keep them the same size,
they must be cast one to other's type.
If no larger fundamental type exists, then it will be upsized to a "bi"
type, which is a fundamental type in CAlive, which is an arbitrary size
"big integer" of the next largest size, such as 64-bit to 128-bit).
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 19:40 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-30 19:50 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 19:56 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-31 13:00 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-31 11:23 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 07:45 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-31 15:02 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 10:52 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-31 20:01 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 13:51 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-31 21:43 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 17:04 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-11-01 01:17 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 19:20 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-10-31 16:02 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 17:06 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-31 13:54 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 07:52 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-10-31 11:16 -0400
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 10:08 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-10-31 14:00 -0400
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-10-31 17:41 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 11:03 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-31 20:04 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-10-31 13:56 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-31 21:49 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-31 12:20 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-01 04:17 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 00:02 -0700
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-01 20:30 +1300
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-01 23:48 +0100
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 16:54 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-02 02:05 +0100
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 17:12 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 17:23 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-02 02:28 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-11-10 15:57 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 08:11 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 18:34 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 10:55 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-11-10 21:08 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 05:14 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-11-12 13:31 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 06:21 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-11-12 14:29 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 06:36 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 06:45 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 06:48 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-11-12 15:59 +0100
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 07:03 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-11-12 16:21 +0000
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 09:09 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 09:16 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 09:46 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 09:51 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 10:01 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 11:10 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 11:31 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-11-12 12:14 -0800
Re: CAlive and char* p1, p2 --vs-- char *p1, p2 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 12:18 -0800
csiph-web