He didn't, but you just did; MSVC.
So why asking something if you know the answer? wait... don't answer that. I know the answer
He didn't, but you just did; MSVC.
So why asking something if you know the answer? wait... don't answer that. I know the answer
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
Did I say anything to you siacoshkc, saing that what I wrote was inteded towards you? I just said in general.
>> If you couldn't make it work, its because you didn't read about it. Like now. If you just read other posts of this thread, you can make it work. And don't use that unsafe method.
Also, I don't see any '?' for a question
Hardly. Not only are the quoted macros not "bad bad bad", they have a legitimate purpose. For example, what if you have a keyboard that doesn't support the requisite characters? C supports trigraphs for that reason, and C++ supports trigrahs and digrahs. In fact, C blesses the idea with the iso646.h header where the macros aren't much different, and C++ reserves actual keywords such as "and", "or", and "not", for the same purpose.Originally Posted by twomers
My best code is written with the delete key.
I didn't think of that. But to be honest, how many keyboards do you know which don't have &'s or |'s or whatever? I was always told that that kind of defining is 'bad bad bad' ...
How many keyboards do you know that don't have a # on them!!?
The #define is always good for a little obfuscation
No No's:
fflush (stdin); gets (); void main ();
Goodies:
Example of fgets (); The FAQ, C/C++ Reference
My Gear:
OS - Windows XP
IDE - MS Visual C++ 2008 Express Edition
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
>But to be honest, how many keyboards do you know which don't have &'s or |'s or whatever?
None, but my experience with other keyboard layouts is very minimal.
>I was always told that that kind of defining is 'bad bad bad' ...
For the most part it is. If there weren't a standard solution, I would be hesitant to even talk about it unless asked a pointed question.
My best code is written with the delete key.
AND is legal if you #include <iso646.h>
>>AND is legal if you #include <iso646.h>
That header is the one I pointed to.
>>Also, I don't see any '?' for a question
This is my post:
Review the thread.If you see my and Wraithan answer is the same, its because we send it at the same time. Unfortunately I only solved the problem that OP pointed I didn't mention whole the code.
Now it seems that OP problem is solved somehow, but I have question: How OP code can ever be compiled with that AND? <<<<THIS IS THE QUESTION MARK
I remember a header with these defines:
...But this header is not included in OPs code.Code:#define AND && #define OR ||
Learn C++ (C++ Books, C Books, FAQ, Forum Search)
Code painter latest version on sourceforge DOWNLOAD NOW!
Download FSB Data Integrity Tester.
Siavosh K C