How about 2 lines?
Reusable code...it makes C just as simple to crank out code as
scripts. It also keeps a good programmer's skills sharp by always
concentrating only on one language--and seperates the men from
the boyz when it comes to writing quility code. But for the lighthearted
I wouldn't recommend it because power=complexity.
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(int argc, char ** argv) { return (atoi(argv[1])<<4); } /* x*16 */
Now that wasnt so bad was it?
cc -s -O3 bitshift.c
exe size if 3.1K and is much more of an efficient OS call that running
a perl script. But if you prefer scripting then fair enough since for
software developers coding vs. scripting is somewhat of a holy
war.
I'd like to see perl compilers that can compete with C--then I'd
be impressed.
At 07:25 AM 3/12/01 -0600, you wrote:
>Yes, but it's also like killing an ant with a hammer. A little overkill
>when you're doing basic bit-shifting.
>
>Sure, C might be able to do a LOT more than C, but why do you want to
>write 100 lines of code when you can do it in 4?
>
>Jason DeStefano wrote:
>>
>> heh. no, i mean C. it does a LOT more than perl--and a lot faster too. :)
>>
>> At 05:31 PM 3/11/01 -0600, you wrote:
>> >On Sun, 11 Mar 2001, Jason DeStefano wrote:
>> >
>> >> Yeah, its called "C".
>> >
>> >You mean "Perl".
>> >
>> >2.5.9 Shift Operators
>> >
>> >The bit-shift operators (<< and >>) return the value of the left argument
>> >shifted to the left (<<) or to the right (>>) by
>> >the number of bits specified by the right argument. The arguments should
>> >be integers. For example:
>> >
>> >1 << 4; # returns 16
>> >32 >> 4; # returns 2
>> >
>> >Andy
>> >
>_______________________________________________
>tclug-list mailing list
>tclug-list at mn-linux.org
>https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list
>