Re: C to Delphi set problems
From: Bob Richardson (bobrNO_at_SPAMhidbey.com)
Date: 03/12/04
- Next message: Stark: "A quirk ?"
- Previous message: anon: "Re: How do I find strings with wildcards?"
- In reply to: AlanGLLoyd: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Next in thread: Marco van de Voort: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Reply: Marco van de Voort: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Reply: AlanGLLoyd: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Reply: VBDis: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:27:38 -0800
"AlanGLLoyd" <alanglloyd@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040312015013.29815.00003666@mb-m21.aol.com...
> In article <CLudnVJufaYofs3dRVn-vw@whidbeytel.com>, "Bob Richardson"
> <bobrNO@SPAMhidbey.com> writes:
>
> >Isn't the lowest element of an empty set identical to something divided
by
> >zero? In other words, it's undefined, and should throw an exception.
> >
>
> There is no "lowest element" in an empty set.
This is my point. No one complains when an exception is thrown after you try
to divide by zero. It's the programmer's job to prevent such an occurrence,
and if it happens, then he'll get an exception error message. The same
could be said for trying to find the lowest element in a set that is empty.
What I was hoping to do with sets and the translated program could be
handled easily if Boolean operators would work with INT64.
- Next message: Stark: "A quirk ?"
- Previous message: anon: "Re: How do I find strings with wildcards?"
- In reply to: AlanGLLoyd: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Next in thread: Marco van de Voort: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Reply: Marco van de Voort: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Reply: AlanGLLoyd: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Reply: VBDis: "Re: C to Delphi set problems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|