>> At times like this I wish for a time machine and go back and shoot the 
>> moron that first used the 'short-circuit Boolean operators' 
>> expression. Mind you I am normally not an aggressive person.
> 
> I'll help you.
> I'm currently having a 'discussion' with an 'enlightened individual' 
> who's trying to tell me that T-SQL (as in the implementation in MS SQL 
> Server) does the same short-circuit evaluation that C++ and C# (and 
> probably others) do.
> 
> Please note the deliberate sarcasm in the above statement.

...so, an "enlightened individual" is telling an MSVP how her product 
speciality works?

That's interesting...

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

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:48ca88be$1@news.povray.org...

>> For fun I tried babelfish:
>> Ik werkelijk begrijp niet waarom u het zo vindt hard om C. te leren. Er 
>> is slechts een uiterst klein aantal kernverklaringen (als als, terwijl, 
>> terugkeer enz.) en de syntaxis van hen allen is zeer gelijkaardig. Hoe te 
>> om functies te schrijven moet u enkel leren, maar dat is het zelfde voor 
>> om het even welke taal. Schrijven van wiskundige formules is ook zeer 
>> gemakkelijk en gelijkaardig aan bijna elke andere taal die (+ -/* enz. 
>> gebruikt). Als u geavanceerder wilt worden, dan leer om series te 
>> behandelen en welke & en * (vrij gemakkelijke dingen zich te herinneren, 
>> niet bij allen complex), en u bent vrij veel plaatst om 99.999% van de 
>> code van C - met inbegrip van dingen als daar te begrijpen terwijl (*v++ 
>> = *s++); Wat is het probleem?
>
> My God... It's... It's like... [I'm searching for the HGTTG quote]... It's 
> like a psuedo-random assortment of letters!

Dis nie soo erg nie. Dis amper die selfte as Afrikaans, behlawe van die 'ij' 
konstruk. Die taal is maklik vergelyk its soos Zoeloe.
Wat is jou probleem?

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:48caaeeb$1@news.povray.org...

> ...so, an "enlightened individual" is telling an MSVP how her product 
> speciality works?

(MVP)

> That's interesting...

That's one way of putting it.

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:48caab2e$1@news.povray.org...
> Gail wrote:
>>
>> "Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
>> news:48ca7536$1@news.povray.org...
>>>
>>> I guess it depends what you're trying to do. SQL certainly has a few 
>>> known flaws (default column orderings, anyone?), but in general it makes 
>>> it quite simple and easy to do most things.
>>
>> What column orderings?
>
> Apparently some people consider it a bug that you can write queries that 
> depend on the order in which columns are returned (rather than by explicit 
> column names). Since relations are supposed to be sets, that shouldn't be 
> the case.

Some people consider it a bug that the order of rows is undefined without an 
order by statement.
Fortunatly for my sanity (and that of a few other people) in T-SQL columns 
are always returned in the same order if SELECT * is specified. It's the 
order of the column in the system tables.

Post a reply to this message

On 12-Sep-08 20:02, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Gail wrote:
> 
>> How often does a C/C++ programmer really need a function pointer?
> 
> Hopefully very rarely...
> 
>>> Which one is FALSE? Is that 0 or 1? I know it's one or the other, but 
>>> I can never ever remember which - and it's kind of important!
>>
>> 0. Any other value is true.
> 
> I remember that 0 is one thing and everything else is the opposite. But 
> I can never remember which is which.

It's easy, booleans are a sort of integers following the normal 
convention that 0 is false and 1 is true. That any other value also 
works comes from the fact that most processors have a zero flag that you 
can conditionally jump on. Another example of hardware influencing the 
language.

AFAIK the only place where this convention is not used is in shell 
scripts in UN*X. Here the reason is that they are originally not 
booleans but error codes.

At least that is how I think where the conventions come from. Anyone 
more knowledgeable can correct me.

Post a reply to this message

On 12-Sep-08 20:10, Gail wrote:
> 
> "Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
> news:48ca88be$1@news.povray.org...
> 
>>> For fun I tried babelfish:
>>> Ik werkelijk begrijp niet waarom u het zo vindt hard om C. te leren. 
>>> Er is slechts een uiterst klein aantal kernverklaringen (als als, 
>>> terwijl, terugkeer enz.) en de syntaxis van hen allen is zeer 
>>> gelijkaardig. Hoe te om functies te schrijven moet u enkel leren, 
>>> maar dat is het zelfde voor om het even welke taal. Schrijven van 
>>> wiskundige formules is ook zeer gemakkelijk en gelijkaardig aan bijna 
>>> elke andere taal die (+ -/* enz. gebruikt). Als u geavanceerder wilt 
>>> worden, dan leer om series te behandelen en welke & en * (vrij 
>>> gemakkelijke dingen zich te herinneren, niet bij allen complex), en u 
>>> bent vrij veel plaatst om 99.999% van de code van C - met inbegrip 
>>> van dingen als daar te begrijpen terwijl (*v++ = *s++); Wat is het 
>>> probleem?
>>
>> My God... It's... It's like... [I'm searching for the HGTTG quote]... 
>> It's like a psuedo-random assortment of letters!
> 
> Dis nie soo erg nie. Dis amper die selfte as Afrikaans, behlawe van die 
> 'ij' konstruk. 

The ij is originally 'ii' with the second 'i' notifying that it is a 
long vowel. Nowadays it is a single glyph (unless you are using American 
software). The sound changed in the area where the official dutch 
originates to be the same as the 'ei' 'vowel'.

> Die taal is maklik vergelyk its soos Zoeloe.

Het blijft leuk om een taal van de andere kant van de wereld te zien die 
je gewoon kan lezen. Al moet ik zeggen dat als iemand het spreekt het 
meer dan een paar seconden kost om het te vertalen en ik dus elke keer 
de draad kwijtraak.

> Wat is jou probleem?
Ask Andy, not me ;)


BTW Gail, somewhere in october I will hear if there is a change to visit 
SA in 2015. There is also a change that we will be involved in 
preparations for that and be there in februari or so...

Post a reply to this message

andrel a écrit :
>>>> Which one is FALSE? Is that 0 or 1? I know it's one or the other, 
>>>> but I can never ever remember which - and it's kind of important!
>>>
>>> 0. Any other value is true.
>>
>> I remember that 0 is one thing and everything else is the opposite. 
>> But I can never remember which is which.
> 
> It's easy, booleans are a sort of integers following the normal 
> convention that 0 is false and 1 is true. That any other value also 
> works comes from the fact that most processors have a zero flag that you 
> can conditionally jump on. Another example of hardware influencing the 
> language.

There is also a similarity between the behaviours of positive integers, 
multiplication and addition, and booleans, AND and OR. That is:

  Integers			Booleans
a*(b+c) = a*b + a*c		a AND (b OR c) = (a AND b) OR (a AND c)
0 + a = a			false OR a = a
0 * a = 0			false AND a = false
if a>0, a+b>0 for all b		if a is true, a OR b is true for all b
And so on...

It does not work out that well if you set true <-> 0.

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

On 12-Sep-08 21:14, Vincent Le Chevalier wrote:
> andrel a écrit :
>>>>> Which one is FALSE? Is that 0 or 1? I know it's one or the other, 
>>>>> but I can never ever remember which - and it's kind of important!
>>>>
>>>> 0. Any other value is true.
>>>
>>> I remember that 0 is one thing and everything else is the opposite. 
>>> But I can never remember which is which.
>>
>> It's easy, booleans are a sort of integers following the normal 
>> convention that 0 is false and 1 is true. That any other value also 
>> works comes from the fact that most processors have a zero flag that 
>> you can conditionally jump on. Another example of hardware influencing 
>> the language.
> 
> There is also a similarity between the behaviours of positive integers, 
> multiplication and addition, and booleans, AND and OR. That is:
> 
>  Integers            Booleans
> a*(b+c) = a*b + a*c        a AND (b OR c) = (a AND b) OR (a AND c)
> 0 + a = a            false OR a = a
> 0 * a = 0            false AND a = false
> if a>0, a+b>0 for all b        if a is true, a OR b is true for all b
> And so on...
> 
> It does not work out that well if you set true <-> 0.
> 
If you take
   true <-> 0
   false <-> 1
   OR <-> *
   AND <-> +
it works again.

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   The difference is that it will use a hash table rather than a binary tree.

>         I mistakenly thought the current map already did that...

  It's impossible to use a hash table and get the elements in increasing
order with a linear traversal. (Ok, it *is* possible, but then you get an
extremely inefficient hash table.)

>         So the onus of coming up with a function will be on the user?

  It's impossible to provide good (or even working) hash functions for
all possible user-defined types.

> Will it provide some defaults?

  I don't know.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Slime wrote:
>> Method overrides that don't actually override unless you insert special
>> code?
> 
> I'm with Warp on this one: what?

I think he means "method overrides that don't actually override unless you
go through the enormous effort of typing the 'virtual' keyword in the
declaration" :)

Post a reply to this message