Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: What is "complexifying" C? |
| Date | 2015-03-17 15:06 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <me9fso$53d$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <me7jgp$r9e$1@speranza.aioe.org> <me7mv4$hl9$1@dont-email.me> |
On 16/03/2015 22:55, Bartc wrote:
> On 16/03/2015 21:55, jacob navia wrote:
>> The reasoning that operator overloading makes C more complex is wrong,
>> actually the opposite is the case. Adding specific types of numbers into
>> the language itself makes the implementations even *more* complex, and
>> forces decisions into the committee that should be actually left to the
>> users!
>
> I can see the problem you're trying to solve, but perhaps there's a
> better way than adding general operator overloads.
Here's what I believe is a simpler proposal that can achieve similar
results: create a new compiler pragma that links an ordinary function to
a built-in operator. It will of course need compiler support to make it
work.
Example: first define a new type and add some conventional functions to
deal with it:
typedef struct {
char digits[32];
} dec_int; // decimal integer
dec_int add_dec(dec_int a,dec_int b) {
dec_int c;
...... // code to add two dec_ints
return c;
}
Now this can be used like this:
dec_int a, b, c;
a = add_dec(b, c);
This works now in standard C. The new bit is this pragma:
#pragma overload_operator "+" add_dec(dec_int,dec_int)dec_int;
#pragma overload_operator "+" ... other overloads for "+"
...
Now the compiler, when presented with "+" being used with two dec_int
operands, will search that list, and add_dec, and convert:
a = b + c;
to:
a = add_dec(b, c);
For simplicity:
* These functions should take and return operands by value (no memory
to worry about)
* There are no implicit casts to/from standard types; these must be
inserted explicitly
* When searching for a suitable function candidate to match the types
presented to "+", the matches must be exact (otherwise it becomes too
difficult to do a 'closest' match).
This will probably achieve half the objectives of the original proposal.
The functions used to implement the arithmetic can also already exist
(in a library, etc, so the overloads can be superimposed on such a library).
--
Bartc
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-16 22:55 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-16 22:55 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-16 16:41 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-17 00:05 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-17 01:12 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-25 13:58 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-17 07:16 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-17 13:50 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-17 14:59 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-17 15:22 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-17 16:16 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-03-17 14:39 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-17 15:23 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-18 15:40 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-03-18 22:49 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-19 13:55 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-19 15:37 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-03-19 23:06 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-19 22:38 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-20 19:43 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-03-20 07:49 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-20 02:29 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-20 21:37 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-20 03:40 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-20 10:18 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-21 00:19 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-20 03:15 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-22 13:51 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-22 15:21 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-22 00:57 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-22 22:28 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-22 02:59 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-22 11:16 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-23 07:25 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-22 12:06 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-23 17:01 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-23 03:09 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-03-23 01:42 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-22 19:32 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-22 17:34 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-22 20:07 -0400
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-23 00:00 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-23 18:04 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-23 23:22 -0400
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-22 14:54 -0400
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-23 00:35 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-23 17:06 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-23 17:25 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-22 23:33 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-23 18:01 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-23 09:41 -0400
Re: What is "complexifying" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-23 10:23 -0400
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-24 07:10 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-03-23 14:57 -0400
Re: What is "complexifying" C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-24 09:36 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-24 08:42 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-03-24 11:23 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-03-24 10:52 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-03-29 16:58 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-22 02:38 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-03-22 09:11 -0400
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-03-20 06:30 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-20 10:31 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-20 13:49 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-20 09:23 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-21 08:28 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-20 01:04 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-17 08:05 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-17 16:08 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-03-17 11:09 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-17 21:37 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-18 00:40 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-17 15:34 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-17 15:06 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-17 00:05 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-03-16 23:20 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-03-17 16:42 +1300
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Mark Storkamp <mstorkamp@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-17 08:59 -0500
Re: What is "complexifying" C? jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2015-03-17 15:18 +0100
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-17 14:41 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-18 15:47 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-19 00:26 +0000
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-03-19 03:23 -0700
Re: What is "complexifying" C? Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-03-19 11:19 +0000
csiph-web