Re: i disagree
- From: Betov <betov@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 27 Jan 2007 09:04:56 GMT
"rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx" <rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx> écrivait
news:1169857957.483980.115730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
The bottom line is that people around here are claiming that a macro
that expands to more than one instruction follows some magic 1:1
correspondence rule. They neither know what 1:1 means in the
mathematical sense nor in the jargon sense. If a macro generates two
or more machine instructions, that macro invocation (one statement)
maps to *two or more* machine instructions. This is not a 1:1 mapping
in any sense of the term, even if you are being informal.
Told you:
"You should try to explain avb why his HLL Pre-Parser would
not be an Assembler, whereas yours would be one. That would
be funny, clown".
Funny indeed, clown. Thanks for the good laugh time.
:)
Betov.
< http://rosasm.org >
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: i disagree
- From: rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: i disagree
- References:
- Re: i disagree
- From: randyhyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: i disagree
- From: ¬a\\/b
- Re: i disagree
- From: randyhyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: i disagree
- From: KiLVaiDeN
- Re: i disagree
- From: Phil Carmody
- Re: i disagree
- From: KiLVaiDeN
- Re: i disagree
- From: santosh
- Re: i disagree
- From: //\\\\o//\\\\annabee <Free\"
- Re: i disagree
- From: randyhyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: i disagree
- From: ¬a\\/b
- Re: i disagree
- From: David Jones
- Re: i disagree
- From: rhyde@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: i disagree
- Prev by Date: Re: i disagree
- Next by Date: Merge sort
- Previous by thread: Re: i disagree
- Next by thread: Re: i disagree
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|