Pointless waffling about computers.

[Adrian Ratnapala <raka@mailhost.bit.net.au>]

Bjarke Hammersholt Roune writes:


 > >But thatīs really a different problem that the const thing - in fact the
 > >const thing IMHO really is no problem at all. Itīs perhaps a bit sloppy
 > >written, but thatīs it.
 > >
 > It makes it impossible to utilise any of the benefits of using const. I
 > wouldn't be able to use a compiler that did something like that.
 > 
Now as far as I know GCC will warn when you do this, and this is
exactly correct behaviour.  If it does _not_ warn, then that lets
errors slip unnoticed.  If it signals an error when it could continue
compiling, then it will agravate sysadmins and users who just want
to compile someones program without worrying about its correctness
(beyond whether it works or not).  I remember when I first installed
egcs, before it was in very common use, how many more warnings it made.
This is good.  But there was a whole lot of code out there which did
not generate complaints under plain GCC but did under egcs, it would
have been a bloody pain if that stuff suddenly became uncompilable
(even though it was perfectly correct).


> >>>
 > >> Sometimes you REALLY wonder why people couldn't just have agreed on this
 > >> from the start, don't you? I mean, something as stupid as this DOESN'T
 > >>
 > >Well, which one would you have chosen? They are completely equal...
 > >
 > I would have chosen whatever everybody else used.
Weell there are arguments on both sides.  And it depends on what you
find important.  In terms of readabilty, big-endian is better,
becuase it is
                HL
just as you read a hindu-arabic number
                23
Or write a polynomial.
                3*x + 2

On the other hand, I beleive we write hinud-arabic numbers, and
polyinomials around backwareds anyway.  After all, when we have to
extend polyinomials into power series, (without sigma notation) we
must write:
                a[0]  +  a[1]*x  +  a[2]*x^2  +  a[3]*x^3  + ...


So one while the Big is in harmony with Man, Little is in harmony with
God.  I beleive this says something about Man and God.  But what does
it say about computers?