Re: lcc first experience

Bart wrote:
> On May 7, 4:51 pm, nembo kid <u...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Morris Dovey ha scritto:
>>
>>> My application (written in standard-compliant C, of course <g>) ****ted
>>> without any change and ran without any problem.
>> Try do declare a define something like:
>>
>> unsigned char a = 0b1000000;
>>
>> With lcc-win works...with other compilers (i.e. mingw32-gcc) no...you
>> must use hexadecimal 0xF0 or decimal 128.
> 
> You mean 0x40 or decimal 64?
> 
>> Why this?
> 
> 0b-syntax doesn't exist in standard C.
> 
> This actually tells you an awful lot about C and C programmers.
> 
> Implementing binary literals must take all of 10 minutes in a
> compiler, but has rarely been done and is not part of any standard.
> 

Excuse me that is not correct. Took around 30 minutes...

:-)


> And it's not that it's never used; it just that C programmers prefer
> to use ugly macros to writing straight code. Otherwise I'm sure a way
> of writing binary constants (computers are binary, and C is low-level)
> would have been standardised long ago.
> 

This is just a facvility to users. As Mr Dovey proved, it is
VERY easy to get it wrong! It is the best to do it automatically.

> Or, C programmers say to use hexadecimal instead!
> 
> lcc-win32 appears to have this 'extension' (if it's even that because
> it's so trivial to implement), the problem being that the code won't
> then compile anywhere else.
> 

I do not know why this is not used elsewhere.

-- 
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32