Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!ucsd!ucbvax!pasteur!cory.Berkeley.EDU!johnm From: johnm@cory.Berkeley.EDU (John D. Mitchell) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: cond. op. on ='s LHS Message-ID: <11162@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> Date: 15 Feb 91 08:22:00 GMT References: <4155@cernvax.cern.ch> <11073@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <15184@smoke.brl.mil> <16754@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> <11129@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <16782@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU Reply-To: johnm@cory.Berkeley.EDU Lines: 36 In article <16782@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> volpe@camelback.crd.ge.com (Christopher R Volpe) writes: >In article <11129@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, johnm@cory.Berkeley.EDU (John >D. Mitchell) writes: >|>In article <16754@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> volpe@camelback.crd.ge.com >(Christopher R Volpe) writes: >|>[....] >|>>Yes, it's ugly, but it's conceivable that someone might have a good >|>>reason for defining a macro to do this, so that the macro may be used >|>>in an expression context. >|> >|>Aahhh! But context *is* everything. >Huh??? So, like, what's your point? Context: the parts just before and after a word or passage, that determines its meaning. (Webster's New World) In other words, the original poster gave a code snippet without any supporting context. That leaves the meaning up to the reader. I for one assumed that he was talking about using it in 'normal' code (macros being *not* normal :-). >|>One reason to use macros is to hide this sort of cryptic code behind >|>a nice facade. Oh well... if only C had... :-) >Isn't that what I suggested? Again, I'm unclear as to what you're trying >to say. Are you agreeing? Disagreeing? And what is it that you wish C had? Yep, I agree that due to whatever reasons the C language proper and its attendant pre-processor make the expression of some kinds of functionality cryptic, difficult, unreadable, confusing, etc. The ternary operator was built for its ability to be used inside the macro facility of a weak pre-processor. My "Oh well..." comment was a facetious attempt to jest those who always want 'just one more feature'. Sorry for the wasted net-width, John D. Mitchell johnm@cory.Berkeley.EDU