C uses "&" for the address-operator because 'ampersand sounds like "address"'

Re:C uses "&" for the address-operator because 'ampersand so... by a_e_k on Tuesday October 10, 2023 @01:01PM (#37834632)

Another good real-world one that I've done is something like:

    for (bit = 1; bit <= 128; bit <<= 1)

Personally, I like the flexibility.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C uses "&" for the address-operator because 'ampersand so... by bxparks on Tuesday October 10, 2023 @01:52PM (#37835209)

Heh, hopefully not too often. First I thought this loops 128 times. Then 7 times. Then 8 times. Then I thought "undefined behavior" if bit is a uint8_t. But then I thought, I don't have freaking clue because I can't keep all of C's implicit casting and arithmetic operation rules in my head.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C uses "&" for the address-operator because 'ampersand so... by adrian_b on Tuesday October 10, 2023 @02:27PM (#37835640)

A better syntax for loops with geometric progressions like this would be obtained by modifying the syntax for writing arithmetic progressions (e.g. "a:b:c") by using a different separator symbol.

For example, if the separator for geometric progressions would be ":>", your loop example would become "for bit in 1:>128:>2". Another example of (non-ASCII) separator would be "for bit in 1⋮128⋮2"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C uses "&" for the address-operator because 'ampersand so... by kazinator on Tuesday October 10, 2023 @06:38PM (#37838627)

[delayed]

[ Parent | on HN ]