Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Portable C vs Efficient C or "Cost of Portability"
Message-ID: <7934@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 18-Apr-87 23:03:25 EST
Article-I.D.: utzoo.7934
Posted: Sat Apr 18 23:03:25 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Apr-87 23:03:25 EST
References: <213@pyuxe.UUCP>, <7915@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 16
Keywords: portability, performance

> ...(This is the whole
> reason for the ++ and -- operators, for example, since they allow fairly
> direct control of the pdp11 autoincrement/decrement addressing modes.)

Oops.  This seemed so obviously true, given the close match between the
language and the hardware, and the compiler's willingness to do the right
thing, that I never checked for sure.  Turns out I was wrong:  ++ and --
existed in B, well before the 11 entered the picture.  They did reflect
some influence from the pdp7 hardware, according to Dennis, but the B
implementation didn't do anything terribly clever with them.

Modify "This is the whole reason" to "This was the most important use";
I think I can defend that one...
-- 
"We must choose: the stars or     Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
the dust.  Which shall it be?"    {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry