Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!kddlab!titcca!sragwa!wsgw!socslgw!diamond
From: diamond@csl.sony.JUNET (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: struct comparison
Message-ID: <10579@riks.csl.sony.JUNET>
Date: 20 Jul 89 00:00:38 GMT
References: <2874@solo3.cs.vu.nl> <1989Jul14.155312.2063@utzoo.uucp> <2878@kappl.cs.vu.nl> <1989Jul15.210821.7950@utzoo.uucp> <167@ssp1.idca.tds.philips.nl> <1989Jul18.020424.2392@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: diamond@riks. (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Sony Computer Science Laboratory Inc., Tokyo, Japan
Lines: 15

In article <1989Jul18.020424.2392@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:

>Equality comparison on polar representation requires range reduction on
>the angle first.  This leads again to the need for C++, where you can
>define the comparison operation to be arbitrarily complex.

Well, with ordinary integers, overflow might occur.  Does this mean that
"+" should not be provided for integers?

--
-- 
Norman Diamond, Sony Computer Science Lab (diamond%csl.sony.jp@relay.cs.net)
  The above opinions are inherited by your machine's init process (pid 1),
  after being disowned and orphaned.  However, if you see this at Waterloo or
  Anterior, then their administrators must have approved of these opinions.