Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes...
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:28:29 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <vbps3c$31s4d$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vab101$3er$1@reader1.panix.com> <vanq4h$3iieb$1@dont-email.me>
 <875xrkxlgo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vapitn$3u1ub$1@dont-email.me>
 <87o75bwlp8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vaps06$3vg8l$1@dont-email.me>
 <871q27weeh.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829083200.195@kylheku.com>
 <87v7zjuyd8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829084851.962@kylheku.com>
 <87mskvuxe9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vaq9tu$1te8$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbci8r$1c9e8$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vbcs65$eabn$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbekut$1kd24$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vbepcb$q6p2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbgb5q$1ruv8$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vbhbbb$1blt4$1@dont-email.me>
 <87tteqktr8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vbkjqk$201ms$1@dont-email.me>
 <87ttenk2nq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 18:28:29 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="dcf5d3c489b4c68fb3a29f50d34b534a";
	logging-data="3207309"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ENEAueNYs05BS4Trknbph"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BCQCb8Bn7f7THs8PrV1mz/Vtshc=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <87ttenk2nq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Bytes: 3730

On 10/09/2024 15:24, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:


>> Someone objects that you can't in general apply & to arbitrary, unnamed,
>> transient, intermediate values such as 'a + 1'.
> 
> or even just 1.

'1' isn't as good an example; I wanted something that necessarily has to 
be in a transient location like a register. Constants can exist as 
immediate fields in instructions, or in actual memory (eg. for floats).

> 
>> I showed how you could do that using anonymous compound literals which
>> avoids having to create an explicit named temporary which in standard C
>> would need to be outside of that assignment call.
>>
>> But you apparently have a problem it.
> 
> Because you called it a reference to a+1.  The reference is to an
> object.
> 
> I don't know if you were deliberately twisting the term because you are
> now 100% committed to some false symmetry in assignments, or whether you
> are just very loose in your use of terms, but rvalue expressions (C does
> not really use the term, but it's better than non-lvalue expressions)
> can't have "references" to them.  That was all that Waldek Hebisch was
> saying.  Did you think for a second that he did not know that if you put
> an int value into an object you can take the pointer to that object?

He took the symmetry I was claiming for assignment, and created an 
asymmetric counter-example where the dereferencing part of the LHS was 
moved into a function, necessitating the creation of a discrete 
reference for the LHS.

I created a counter-counter-example where dereferences on both sides 
were moved into the function, so restoring the symmetry.

And yes I'm still committed to that symmetry. I'ved used it for 
countless language implementations. C is little different other than it 
has a 700-page standard that suggests a recommended model of how it's 
supposed to work.

You can't really use that to bash me about the head with and maintain 
that all my ideas about language implementation are wrong because C 
views assignment in its own idiosyncratic manner.