Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utcsri.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!hofbauer
From: hofbauer@utcsri.UUCP (John Hofbauer)
Newsgroups: net.math,net.lang.c,net.arch
Subject: Re: Integer division
Message-ID: <2080@utcsri.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 9-Feb-86 19:21:24 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsri.2080
Posted: Sun Feb  9 19:21:24 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Feb-86 19:42:33 EST
References: <11603@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <4917@alice.UUCP> <367@mcgill-vision.UUCP> <685@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 16

> This % vs. Mod debate is rather silly.  C's % operator is
> NOT repeat NOT intended to be a modulo operator, although
> people often use it that way for positive operands.  All
> reasonable mathematicians agree on what the definition of
> 	a mod b
> is for positive b and negative a.  That should not be
> confused with what the result of
> 	a % b
> should be under similar circumstances.  C intentionally
> hedges a bit on the meaning of % 

To paraphrase Alice In Wonderland loosely, an operator means
whatever you want it to mean, nothing more, nothing less.
The remainder of a machine integer division is defined as
being whatever the engineer's found convenient to implement.
Any resemblance to mathematics is purely coincidental.