[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Machin) writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Jackson) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >
> > A: 42
> >
> > Q: What multiple of 7 did I add to the critical expression in the Zeller
> > algorithm so it would remain nonnegative for the next few centuries?
>
lers that use "ANSI C" as the target
machine. By using C as a portable assembler instead of generating
machine code, the number of supported platforms increases
dramatically.
>> Now, I'll agree with you if you want to argue that some machines do
>> negative integer divisio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Jackson) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
> A: 42
>
> Q: What multiple of 7 did I add to the critical expression in the Zeller
> algorithm so it would remain nonnegative for the next few centuries?
What are you calling "the Zeller algorithm", and what
Jive Dadson wrote:
> > Now, I'll agree with you if you want to argue that some machines do
> > negative integer division in stupifyingly horrible ways.
>
> That's why I think it was a stupifyingly horrible decision.
> Understandable, but in the end an s.h.d. nonethel
Jive Dadson wrote:
I've forgotten what we are arguing about, but I'm sure I'm right.
^^^ QOTW
--Scott David Daniels
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Grant Edwards wrote:
This is pretty much completely off-topic now. :)
No discussion of how lame other languages are is ever
completely off-topic in comp.lang.python. After all,
these discussions continue to remind us how lucky we
all are to be able to program in Python, and that
can only be a goo
On 2005-02-09, Jive Dadson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> intentionally
I disagree!
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! ... I don't like
at FRANK SINATRA or his
visi.comCHILDREN.
--
On 2005-02-09, Jive Dadson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[C] isn't - it's a portable assembler.
>>>
>>> I've heard that many times, but it makes no sense to me.
>>
>> I think the point is that C is a low-level, hardware twiddling
>> language to be used by people writing things like kernel code
intentionally
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> On 2005-02-09, Jive Dadson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> [C] isn't - it's a portable assembler.
> >
> > I've heard that many times, but it makes no sense to me.
>
> I think the point is that C is a low-level, hardware twiddling
> language to be used by people writi
ngs like kernel code --
something that was always done in assembler before C came
along.
>> Now, I'll agree with you if you want to argue that some
>> machines do negative integer division in stupifyingly horrible
>> ways.
>
> That's why I think it was a stupif
st certainly not an
assembler.
> Now, I'll agree with you if you want to argue that some machines do
> negative integer division in stupifyingly horrible ways.
That's why I think it was a stupifyingly horrible decision.
Understandable, but in the end an s.h.d. nonetheless. It wou
oes.
Now, I'll agree with you if you want to argue that some machines do
negative integer division in stupifyingly horrible ways.
http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Mark Jackson wrote:
> Imbaud Pierre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > integer division and modulo gives different results in c and
python,
> > when negative numbers
> > are involved. take gdb as a widely available c interpreter
> > print -2 /3
> > 0 for c, -1 for python.
> > more amazing, modulos o
Python does it right. C is allowed to do it anyway it likes, which was
a stupifyingly horrible decision, IMHO.
Way back when, there was a language named Pascal. I lobbied the Pascal
standards committee to define the modulus operator correctly, which they
eventually did. To my astonishment, they
Imbaud Pierre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> integer division and modulo gives different results in c and python,
> when negative numbers
> are involved. take gdb as a widely available c interpreter
> print -2 /3
> 0 for c, -1 for python.
> more amazing, modulos of negative number give negative v
Imbaud Pierre wrote:
integer division and modulo gives different results in c and python,
when negative numbers
are involved. take gdb as a widely available c interpreter
print -2 /3
0 for c, -1 for python.
more amazing, modulos of negative number give negative values! (in c).
from an algebraic p
Imbaud Pierre wrote:
integer division and modulo gives different results in c and python,
when negative numbers
are involved. take gdb as a widely available c interpreter
print -2 /3
0 for c, -1 for python.
more amazing, modulos of negative number give negative values! (in c).
from an algebraic p
Imbaud> integer division and modulo gives different results in c and
Imbaud> python, when negative numbers are involved.
http://www.python.org/doc/faq/programming.html#why-does-22-10-return-3
Skip
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
integer division and modulo gives different results in c and python,
when negative numbers
are involved. take gdb as a widely available c interpreter
print -2 /3
0 for c, -1 for python.
more amazing, modulos of negative number give negative values! (in c).
from an algebraic point of view, python
20 matches
Mail list logo
