> -----Original Message----- > From: Mark J. Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 16 April, 2004 11:43 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: backticks > > > On 2004-04-16 at 11:17:41, Austin Hastings wrote: > > I'm totally willing to agree with you, Mark. > > > A) Do you code hashing algorithms so frequently that you need a special, > > low-cost-of-access operator built in to the language to support it? > > Nope. I'd be perfectly happy if the modulus operator were spelled "mod" > instead of %, which has never struck me as particularly intuitive. > My point was simply that % is not necessarily redundant with & in its > most common uses. You can certainly still make a good argument for its > repurposing on other grounds, but not that one. :)
I wasn't arguing that % is redundant with &. I was arguing that inclusion of a special operator in 'C' was a failure, since the most common implementation of modulo was done with & anyway. Frankly, K&R should have used % for printf or return, and stuck modulo() into the standard library someplace. Maybe if they'd had % available, 'C' would have associative arrays... :-) =Austin
