Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!gatech!hao!noao!arizona!naucse!sbw
From: sbw@naucse.UUCP (Steve Wampler)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: The D Programming Language (was: Still more new operators)
Summary: i(x1,...,xn) not *too* expensive, he says
Message-ID: <563@naucse.UUCP>
Date: 10 Feb 88 00:12:14 GMT
References: <11702@brl-adm.ARPA> <558@naucse.UUCP> <2523@haddock.ISC.COM>
Organization: Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ
Lines: 21

In article <2523@haddock.ISC.COM>, karl@haddock.ISC.COM (Karl Heuer) writes:
> In article <558@naucse.UUCP> rrr@naucse.UUCP (Bob Rose ) writes:
> >But wait, we can do better [than the proposed ",,"]. ...
> >              i(x1, x2, x3, ..., xn)
> >[where 1 <= i <= n; the result is xi]
> ...  If `i' is allowed to be an arbitrary integral
> expression (which I presume is the case in interpretive Icon), then it is
> indeed more powerful but also more expensive to compute.  Part of the beauty
> of `,,' is that it has a cost comparable to `,'.

Actually, if 'i' is an arbitrary integral expression, it isn't that much more
expensive to implement than if it's a constant - most of the evaluation
mechanism is already in place in C (excuse me, 'D').  The only extra expense
over computing the value if 'i' is a constant is the cost of evaluating the
expression for 'i' and a simple transfer.


Sigh, let's just keep postnews happy here...
-- 
	Steve Wampler
	{....!arizona!naucse!sbw}