Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:54:43 05/28/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 27, 2004 at 20:11:52, Filip Tvrzsky wrote:
>On May 27, 2004 at 19:05:42, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On May 27, 2004 at 18:41:59, Randall Shane wrote:
>>
>>>On May 27, 2004 at 18:10:47, Uri Blass wrote:
>>><snippage>
>>>>
>>>>I do not get the same move twice when I have
>>>>printf("%s ",move_str(0));
>>>>printf("%s ",move_str(1));
>>>>
>>>>I thought that
>>>>printf("%s %s ",move_str(0),move_str(1));
>>>>should be exactly the same instruction.
>>>>
>>>>I understand now that it is not and the second printf does not print move_str(1)
>>>>immediatly after it calculates it but calculates also move_str(0) and change the
>>>>value of move_str(1) by doing it.
>>>>
>>>>I think that it is a bug in the language or in the compiler because it is clear
>>>>that the programmer mean the same in both cases.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>correct compiler can solve the problem by translating
>>>>
>>>>printf("%s %s ",move_str(0),move_str(1));
>>>>to
>>>>printf("%s ",move_str(0));
>>>>printf("%s ",move_str(1));
>>>>
>>>>I see no logical reason not to translate it in that way from human point of
>>>>view.
>>>
>>>Ah, but how is the compiler supposed to know that you didn't mean to overwrite
>>>the array, which is defined internal to your move_str routine?
>> Without
>>>extensive and deep analysis of the routines, it can't make that assumption.
>>
>>
>>I think it can make this assumption.
>>I see no reason to write one printf of 2 strings and to mean different thing
>>than the thing that is done by 2 printf.
>>
>>It is a confusing code.
>
>Uri, I am sorry, but this is really YOUR fault, not compiler fault. I am also
>little bit suprised at your complaints about compiler behaviour knowing your
>strictly logical style of thinking. Because when you read language specification
>and think thoroughly about it then you should realize that compiler does exactly
>what is supposed to do and not what it could assume to be your wish. And thank
>God for it! Because I am sick of software which knows better than me what I
>want.
>Filip
In that case it is a mistake in defining the language.
I did not read language specification and I simply generalized based on previous
experience.
I also think that the compiler should at least give a warning in that case
because I guess that I am not the first person and not the last person to do
that kind of mistake.
I guess that in big majority of the cases that programmers write printf("%s %s
",a,b);
they mean printf("%s ",a); orintf(" %s ",b);
If the expressions are not the same the compiler should at least warn the
programmer about it.
Uri
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.