>   I wouldn't call this straightforward:
> 
> fibs = 0 : 1 : zipWith (+) fibs (tail fibs)

OK, well how about this:

   while (TRUE) { cont = (*cont)(); }

I wouldn't exactly call that straightfoward either. It's not *actually* 
complicated, but it sure *looks* pretty baffling.

Alternatively,

   while(*v++ = *s++);

I mean, what THE HELL...?

>> At any rate, presumably you can completely forget Warp's 
>> "don't use pointers" rule if you want to talk to OpenGL - or any other 
>> API designed for C. ;-)
> 
>   I don't recall OpenGL requiring that many pointers either. Just tons
> of straight function calls.

Mmm, actually... yes, doesn't it tend to refer to thing by numerical 
indecies rather than actual pointers?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message