Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ben Bacarisse Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes... Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:57:30 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 55 Message-ID: <87mskwy9t1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> References: <92ab79736a70ea1563691d22a9b396a20629d8cf@i2pn2.org> <87r0abzcsj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <874j75zftu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 16:57:30 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="237f3e3432f89091aec497bdbc144a02"; logging-data="3689870"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/XIUHq03Ci0oq1NFkDQHOdcdDiyJY/Ops=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Kt91dl/nWBgHDj95K49is9JXx1s= sha1:j36FL04/tvVYcsmuGViv6PaGKTg= X-BSB-Auth: 1.5378a3815d2dffb9834e.20240828155730BST.87mskwy9t1.fsf@bsb.me.uk Bytes: 3350 Bart writes: > On 28/08/2024 00:49, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Indeed, and BLISS is not like that. I had hoped to shed some light on >> why there is some logic to BLISS's rather idiosyncratic design. >> >>> Given a declaration like 'int A' then: >>> >>> BLISS C >>> >>> Read or write A's value .A A >> I don't think that's right. To change the value at address A (what I >> think you mean by "write A's value") you write >> A = 42; >> in BLISS. And to add one to the value at address A you write >> A = .A + 1; > > OK. That's just makes it more bizarre than I'd thought. Curious. It's what makes it consistent, though it is definitely an uncommon approach. > The example I saw > included these lines: > > GETNUM(X); ! returns a value via X > Y = STEP(.X); > PUTNUM(.Y) > > So in an rvalue context: X reads its address; while .X reads its > value. The whole point is to remove the two contexts. A variable name is /always/ an lvalue (which is why it can be assigned). C has an implicit lvalue to rvalue conversion in the contexts you have come to expect it. BLISS does not. You always need a dot to convert to an rvalue. > But in an lvalue one: Y writes its value; .Y may not be defined > > It looks asymmetric. C like most languages is symmetric, you write 'A = A' > with the same syntax on both sides. Since assignment is inherently asymmetric (you can't write 3 = A but you can write A = 3) C's syntactic symmetry hides a semantic difference. What is needed on the two sides is not the same. > I assume that in BLISS, A = A is legal, but does something odd like copy > A's address into itself. What's odd about that? And why call is a copy operation? Do you think of A = 42 as a copy operation? BLISS is a low-level system language. -- Ben.