Re: Range-aware modulo operator -%

Subject	Re: Range-aware modulo operator -%
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c, comp.lang.c++
References	(5 earlier) <A9xVD.313699$_35.734@fx46.iad> <q0d7ja$tgl$1@dont-email.me> <bWsWD.95201$fy7.3260@fx35.am4> <q0dq6u$hqr$1@dont-email.me> <PwvWD.153560$ny2.49860@fx38.am4>
From	Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org>
Message-ID	<7hwWD.260396$vt3.140635@fx43.iad> (permalink)
Organization	Forte - www.forteinc.com
Date	2018-12-31 16:57 -0500

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 12/31/18 4:05 PM, Bart wrote:
> On 31/12/2018 19:22, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Assuming you are still using * from C, that means that for dereferencing
> a pointer to struct member, you can use:
> 
>   (*p).m
>   p->m
>   m<-p
>   [p].m
>   p~~m
> 
> For dereferencing a double pointer to a struct member, the choices are:
> 
>   (*(*q)).m
>   (*q)->m
>   m<-(*q)
>   [[q]].m
>   [q]->m
>   m<-[q]
>   q~~m       # ???
> 
> You see the problem? The syntax I use has ONE way to dereference a
> pointer (postfix "^"), and ONE way to select a member ("."):
> 
> These examples must be written
> 
>      p^.m        # one pointer level, one ^
>      q^^.m       # two pointer levels, two ^
> 
> Both access one member, so both have one ".". Take out member select:
> 
>     p^           # access the whole struct
>     q^^
> 
> Try and take out the member select part of the 10 or 12 examples in your
> syntax; you can't just remove the ".m", because most of them don't use it.
> 
> C syntax has always been a mess that way. Your additions make it worse.
> 
> 

your syntax isn't that different than C in my view.

In C *p, in your p^
Both get you 'the object pointed to by p), to which you can add more
indirection of member selection.

C adds a 'shortcut' of p->m as the syntax sugar for (*p).m

Perhaps having the indirect operation being postfix instead of prefix
cleans up some issue with syntax, getting rid of some needs of parenthesis.

For C, with the need of the parenthesis, the shortcut seems useful, and
having 2 notations doesn't seem that bad.

Rick's multitude of options seems much less useful, and I suspect he is
going to run into parsing issues with his grammar.

...

>> All variables have an implicit underscore variable form unless there
>> is an explicitly created underscore variable name in scope.  If you
>> create "char* x" there's an implicit _x which is the unsigned integer
>> equivalent value that can be used.
> 
> Say again? I expected you to say that _x means *x, some syntactic sugar.
> You mean that _x means '*(unsigned char)x'?
> 

I think Rick means that _x is like (uintptr_t)x

Thread

Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-27 21:09 -0500
  Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-12-27 21:34 -0500
    Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 05:37 +0100
    Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2018-12-29 16:04 -0500
      Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-12-29 19:13 -0500
  Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2018-12-28 03:05 +0000
    Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2018-12-27 21:31 -0600
      Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2018-12-28 04:20 +0000
    Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2018-12-27 19:32 -0800
      Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2018-12-28 04:18 +0000
  Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-12-28 12:29 +0000
    Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 08:10 -0500
      Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-12-28 10:25 -0500
        Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-12-28 15:56 +0000
          Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-12-28 17:26 -0500
            Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2018-12-28 23:45 +0100
        Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 11:44 -0500
        Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 12:16 -0500
          Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-12-28 17:08 -0500
            Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2018-12-28 15:01 -0800
            Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 09:04 -0500
              Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-12-31 18:07 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 14:22 -0500
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-12-31 21:05 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-31 16:32 -0500
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-12-31 23:43 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2018-12-31 16:44 -0800
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-01 01:06 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2018-12-31 19:06 -0800
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-01 11:32 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-01 12:48 -0800
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-01 23:54 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-01 16:09 -0800
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-02 00:49 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-01 17:53 -0800
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-02 02:36 +0000
                Leader Kiki is not going to like this... (Was: Range-aware modulo operator -%) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-01-02 08:36 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-02 00:38 -0800
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2019-01-01 22:40 -0700
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-02 12:12 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-01-01 01:53 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-12-31 16:57 -0500
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2018-12-31 22:33 +0000
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2018-12-31 13:34 -0800
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2018-12-31 16:43 -0500
                Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2018-12-31 15:20 -0800
  Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% Eduardo <abdulai60@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 07:18 -0800
    Re: Range-aware modulo operator -% "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2018-12-28 11:45 -0500

csiph-web